ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
The achievable rate region of 802.11-scheduled multihop networks
Full text PdfPdf (918 KB)
Source IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (TON) archive
Volume 17 ,  Issue 4  (August 2009) table of contents
Pages 1118-1131  
Year of Publication: 2009
ISSN:1063-6692
Authors
Apoorva Jindal  Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Konstantinos Psounis  Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
Publisher
IEEE Press  Piscataway, NJ, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 35,   Downloads (12 Months): 35,   Citation Count: 0
Additional Information:

abstract   references   index terms  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: 10.1109/TNET.2008.2007844

ABSTRACT

In this paper, we characterize the achievable rate region for any IEEE 802.11-scheduled static multihop network. To do so, we first characterize the achievable edge-rate region, that is, the set of edge rates that are achievable on the given topology. This requires a careful consideration of the interdependence among edges since neighboring edges collide with and affect the idle time perceived by the edge under study. We approach this problem in two steps. First, we consider two-edge topologies and study the fundamental ways they interact. Then, we consider arbitrary multihop topologies, compute the effect that each neighboring edge has on the edge under study in isolation, and combine to get the aggregate effect. We then use the characterization of the achievable edge-rate region to characterize the achievable rate region. We verify the accuracy of our analysis by comparing the achievable rate region derived from simulations with the one derived analytically. We make a couple of interesting and somewhat surprising observations while deriving the rate regions. First, the achievable rate region with 802.11 scheduling is not necessarily convex. Second, the performance of 802.11 is surprisingly good. For example, in all the topologies used for model verification, the max-min allocation under 802.11 is at least 64% of the max-min allocation under a perfect scheduler.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

1
2
3
 
4
D. Raychaudhuri, I. Seskar, M. Ott, S. Ganu, K. Ramachandran, H. Kremo, R. Siracusa, H. Liu, and M. Singh, "Overview of the orbit radio grid testbed for evaluation of next-generation wireless network protocols," in Proc. IEEE WCNC, 2005, vol. 3, pp. 1664-1669.
5
6
 
7
S. Ray, D. Starobinski, and J. Carruthers, "Performance of wireless networks with hidden nodes: A queuing-theoretic analysis," J. Comput. Commun., vol. 28, pp. 1179-1192, 2005.
8
 
9
10
 
11
X. Wang and K. Kar, "Throughput modeling and fairness issues in CSMA/CA based ad-hoc networks," in Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, 2005, pp. 23-34.
 
12
C. Reis, R. Mahajan, M. Rodrig, D. Wetherall, and J. Zahorjan, "Measurement-based models of delivery and interference," in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, 2006, pp. 51-62.
 
13
H. Chang, V. Misra, and D. Rubenstein, "A general model and analysis of physical layer capture in 802.11 networks," in Proc. IEEE INFOCOM , 2006.
14
 
15
M. Garetto, T. Salonidis, and E. Knightly, "Modeling per-flow throughput and capturing starvation in CSMA multi-hop wireless networks," in Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, 2006.
16
 
17
K. Medepalli and F. A. Tobagi, "Towards performance modeling of IEEE 802.11 based wireless networks: A unified framework and its applications," in Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, 2006.
18
19
 
20
Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications--Higher-Speed Physical Layer Extension in the 2.4 GHz Band, IEEE Std 802.11b-1999, Nov. 2002.
 
21
G. Bianchi, "Performance analysis of the IEEE 802.11 distributed coordination function," IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun., vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 535-547, Mar. 2000.
 
22
G. Sharma, A. Ganesh, and P. Key, "Performance analysis of contention based medium access control protocols," in Proc. IEEE INFOCOM , 2006.
 
23
A. Jindal and K. Psounis, "Characterizing the achievable rate region of wireless multi-hop networks with 802.11 scheduling," Univ. of Southern California, Tech. Rep. CENG-2007-12, 2007.
 
24
P. Chaporkar, K. Kar, X. Luo, and S. Sarkar, "Throughput and fairness guarantees through maximal scheduling in wireless networks," IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 572-594, Feb. 2008.
 
25
V. I. Istratescu, Fixed Point Theory, An Introduction. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: D. Reidel, 1981.
 
26
A. Granas and J. Dugundji, Fixed Point Theory. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2003.
 
27
28
 
29
M. Durvy, O. Dousse, and P. Thiran, "Border effects, fairness, and phase transition in large wireless networks," in Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, 2008, pp. 601-609.
30
 
31
K. Tan, F. Jiang, Q. Zhang, and X. Shen, "Congestion control in multihop wireless networks," IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol., vol. 56, no. 2, pp. 863-873, Mar. 2007.
 
32
33
 
34
A. Jindal and K. Psounis, "Achievable rate region and optimality of multi-hop wireless 802.11-scheduled network," in Proc. Inf. Theory Appl. Workshop, 2008.
 
35
 
36
T. Salonidis, M. Garetto, A. Saha, and E. Knightly, "Identifying high throughput paths in 802.11 mesh networks: A model-based approach," in Proc. IEEE ICNP, 2007, pp. 21-30.
37