Towards Concurrent Communication in Wireless Networks. Son, D., Heidemann, J., & Krishnamachari, B. Technical Report ISI-TR-2007-648, USC/Information Sciences Institute, July, 2007. ![Towards Concurrent Communication in Wireless Networks [link]](https://bibbase.org/img/filetypes/link.svg "link")
Paper abstract bibtex Avoiding collisions is one of the key roles of media-access (MAC) protocols. Since MACAW and 802.11, carrier sense and exchange of request-to-send (RTS) and clear-to-send (CTS) packets have been used to prevent concurrent communication in wireless networks. Yet these approaches have significant cost: they prevent \emphall concurrent communication, even exchanges that might not result in loss; they reduce end-to-end throughput in a multi-hop network; and control traffic imposes control overhead on networks with small data payloads such as 802.15.4. In this paper, we show that RTS/CTS is almost \emphnever desirable in modern wireless networks that support power control and channel capture. We use four-node experiments with 802.15.4 radios to show that \emphconcurrent communication is often possible, depending on node locations and transmit powers. We validate an SINR-based propagation model against these experiments and use simulation to systematically explore how node location affects the ability to communicate. Given optimal power settings, when two sources are outside some minimal distance, they can communicate concurrently with two receivers more than 80% of the time. An optimal algorithm requires perfect knowledge of the channel and transmission state, so we then sketch \emphGain-Adaptive Power Control, a MAC protocol that provides significant benefit with only local and prior information. Compared to optimal, we show that this practical MAC can transmit concurrently 75% of the time, but requires a larger minimum source separation. We also show that least one sender can capture the channel 77–88% of the time, regardless of source and receiver location, so the cost of failed concurrent communication is only slightly worse than RTS/CTS. These results provide compelling evidence that future MAC protocols should exploit power control and channel capture.
@TechReport{Son07b,
author = "Dongjin Son and John Heidemann and Bhaskar Krishnamachari",
title = "Towards Concurrent Communication in Wireless Networks",
institution = "USC/Information Sciences Institute",
year = 2007,
sortdate = "2007-07-01",
project = "ilense, nocredit, macss",
jsubject = "wireless_propagation",
number = "ISI-TR-2007-648",
month = jul,
location = "johnh: pafile",
keywords = "RTS/CTS, concurrent transmission, channel capture",
url = "http://www.isi.edu/%7ejohnh/PAPERS/Son07b.html",
pdfurl = "http://www.isi.edu/%7ejohnh/PAPERS/Son07b.pdf",
copyrightholder = "authors",
myorganization = "USC/Information Sciences Institute",
abstract = "
Avoiding collisions is one of the key roles of media-access (MAC)
protocols. Since MACAW and 802.11, carrier sense and exchange of
request-to-send (RTS) and clear-to-send (CTS) packets have been used
to prevent concurrent communication in wireless networks. Yet these
approaches have significant cost: they prevent \emph{all} concurrent
communication, even exchanges that might not result in loss; they
reduce end-to-end throughput in a multi-hop network; and control
traffic imposes control overhead on networks with small data payloads
such as 802.15.4. In this paper, we show that RTS/CTS is almost
\emph{never} desirable in modern wireless networks that support power
control and channel capture. We use four-node experiments with
802.15.4 radios to show that \emph{concurrent communication} is often
possible, depending on node locations and transmit powers. We
validate an SINR-based propagation model against these experiments and
use simulation to systematically explore how node location affects the
ability to communicate. Given optimal power settings, when two
sources are outside some minimal distance, they can communicate
concurrently with two receivers more than 80\% of the time. An
optimal algorithm requires perfect knowledge of the channel and
transmission state, so we then sketch \emph{Gain-Adaptive Power
Control}, a MAC protocol that provides significant benefit with only
local and prior information. Compared to optimal, we show that this
practical MAC can transmit concurrently 75\% of the time, but requires
a larger minimum source separation. We also show that least one
sender can capture the channel 77--88\% of the time, regardless of
source and receiver location, so the cost of failed concurrent
communication is only slightly worse than RTS/CTS. These results
provide compelling evidence that future MAC protocols should exploit
power control and channel capture.
",
}
% title = "{RMST}: Reliable Data Transport in Sensor Networks",
Downloads: 0
{"_id":"uc5MBYtb3wyPgu5tb","bibbaseid":"son-heidemann-krishnamachari-towardsconcurrentcommunicationinwirelessnetworks-2007","author_short":["Son, D.","Heidemann, J.","Krishnamachari, B."],"bibdata":{"bibtype":"techreport","type":"techreport","author":[{"firstnames":["Dongjin"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Son"],"suffixes":[]},{"firstnames":["John"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Heidemann"],"suffixes":[]},{"firstnames":["Bhaskar"],"propositions":[],"lastnames":["Krishnamachari"],"suffixes":[]}],"title":"Towards Concurrent Communication in Wireless Networks","institution":"USC/Information Sciences Institute","year":"2007","sortdate":"2007-07-01","project":"ilense, nocredit, macss","jsubject":"wireless_propagation","number":"ISI-TR-2007-648","month":"July","location":"johnh: pafile","keywords":"RTS/CTS, concurrent transmission, channel capture","url":"http://www.isi.edu/%7ejohnh/PAPERS/Son07b.html","pdfurl":"http://www.isi.edu/%7ejohnh/PAPERS/Son07b.pdf","copyrightholder":"authors","myorganization":"USC/Information Sciences Institute","abstract":"Avoiding collisions is one of the key roles of media-access (MAC) protocols. Since MACAW and 802.11, carrier sense and exchange of request-to-send (RTS) and clear-to-send (CTS) packets have been used to prevent concurrent communication in wireless networks. Yet these approaches have significant cost: they prevent \\emphall concurrent communication, even exchanges that might not result in loss; they reduce end-to-end throughput in a multi-hop network; and control traffic imposes control overhead on networks with small data payloads such as 802.15.4. In this paper, we show that RTS/CTS is almost \\emphnever desirable in modern wireless networks that support power control and channel capture. We use four-node experiments with 802.15.4 radios to show that \\emphconcurrent communication is often possible, depending on node locations and transmit powers. We validate an SINR-based propagation model against these experiments and use simulation to systematically explore how node location affects the ability to communicate. Given optimal power settings, when two sources are outside some minimal distance, they can communicate concurrently with two receivers more than 80% of the time. An optimal algorithm requires perfect knowledge of the channel and transmission state, so we then sketch \\emphGain-Adaptive Power Control, a MAC protocol that provides significant benefit with only local and prior information. Compared to optimal, we show that this practical MAC can transmit concurrently 75% of the time, but requires a larger minimum source separation. We also show that least one sender can capture the channel 77–88% of the time, regardless of source and receiver location, so the cost of failed concurrent communication is only slightly worse than RTS/CTS. These results provide compelling evidence that future MAC protocols should exploit power control and channel capture. ","bibtex":"@TechReport{Son07b,\n\tauthor = \t\"Dongjin Son and John Heidemann and Bhaskar Krishnamachari\",\n\ttitle = \t\"Towards Concurrent Communication in Wireless Networks\",\n\tinstitution = \t\"USC/Information Sciences Institute\",\n\tyear = \t\t2007,\n\tsortdate = \"2007-07-01\",\n\tproject = \"ilense, nocredit, macss\",\n\tjsubject = \"wireless_propagation\",\n\tnumber =\t\"ISI-TR-2007-648\",\n\tmonth =\t\tjul,\n\tlocation =\t\"johnh: pafile\",\n\tkeywords =\t\"RTS/CTS, concurrent transmission, channel capture\",\n\turl =\t\t\"http://www.isi.edu/%7ejohnh/PAPERS/Son07b.html\",\n\tpdfurl =\t\"http://www.isi.edu/%7ejohnh/PAPERS/Son07b.pdf\",\n\tcopyrightholder = \"authors\",\n\tmyorganization = \t\"USC/Information Sciences Institute\",\n\tabstract = \"\nAvoiding collisions is one of the key roles of media-access (MAC)\nprotocols. Since MACAW and 802.11, carrier sense and exchange of\nrequest-to-send (RTS) and clear-to-send (CTS) packets have been used\nto prevent concurrent communication in wireless networks. Yet these\napproaches have significant cost: they prevent \\emph{all} concurrent\ncommunication, even exchanges that might not result in loss; they\nreduce end-to-end throughput in a multi-hop network; and control\ntraffic imposes control overhead on networks with small data payloads\nsuch as 802.15.4. In this paper, we show that RTS/CTS is almost\n\\emph{never} desirable in modern wireless networks that support power\ncontrol and channel capture. We use four-node experiments with\n802.15.4 radios to show that \\emph{concurrent communication} is often\npossible, depending on node locations and transmit powers. We\nvalidate an SINR-based propagation model against these experiments and\nuse simulation to systematically explore how node location affects the\nability to communicate. Given optimal power settings, when two\nsources are outside some minimal distance, they can communicate\nconcurrently with two receivers more than 80\\% of the time. An\noptimal algorithm requires perfect knowledge of the channel and\ntransmission state, so we then sketch \\emph{Gain-Adaptive Power\nControl}, a MAC protocol that provides significant benefit with only\nlocal and prior information. Compared to optimal, we show that this\npractical MAC can transmit concurrently 75\\% of the time, but requires\na larger minimum source separation. We also show that least one\nsender can capture the channel 77--88\\% of the time, regardless of\nsource and receiver location, so the cost of failed concurrent\ncommunication is only slightly worse than RTS/CTS. These results\nprovide compelling evidence that future MAC protocols should exploit\npower control and channel capture.\n\",\n}\n\n%\ttitle = \t\"{RMST}: Reliable Data Transport in Sensor Networks\",\n","author_short":["Son, D.","Heidemann, J.","Krishnamachari, B."],"bibbaseid":"son-heidemann-krishnamachari-towardsconcurrentcommunicationinwirelessnetworks-2007","role":"author","urls":{"Paper":"http://www.isi.edu/%7ejohnh/PAPERS/Son07b.html"},"keyword":["RTS/CTS","concurrent transmission","channel capture"],"metadata":{"authorlinks":{}}},"bibtype":"techreport","biburl":"https://bibbase.org/f/dHevizJoWEhWowz8q/johnh-2023-2.bib","dataSources":["YLyu3mj3xsBeoqiHK","fLZcDgNSoSuatv6aX","fxEParwu2ZfurScPY","7nuQvtHTqKrLmgu99"],"keywords":["rts/cts","concurrent transmission","channel capture"],"search_terms":["towards","concurrent","communication","wireless","networks","son","heidemann","krishnamachari"],"title":"Towards Concurrent Communication in Wireless Networks","year":2007}