Memo » Historial » Versió 1
Axel Neumann, 28-05-2014 12:41
1 | 1 | Axel Neumann | h1. Mobility performance Evaluation of Mesh rOuting protocols (MEMO) |
---|---|---|---|
2 | |||
3 | Experimentation Project executed by "RouteK S.L.":http://routek.net as part of "Federation for FIRE (Fed4Fire)":http://www.fed4fire.eu integrated project and funded as "Innovative Experiments by SMEs Fed4FIRE-SME-1":http://www.fed4fire.eu/open-calls/1st-call-for-sme-closed.html |
||
4 | |||
5 | h2. Project Summary |
||
6 | |||
7 | In contrast to traditional IP-mobility solutions (like MIPv6), which require a pre-deployed infrastructure and are limited to the coverage range of the core-backbone nodes, a fully mesh-based solution can conceptually provide a self-organized network that does not require any pre-deployed infrastructure and which’s coverage expands as nodes participate in the network. However, the performance of mesh networks in the presence of mobile mesh nodes is unclear. |
||
8 | |||
9 | This project focuses, from an experimental point of view, on the capabilities of several mesh routing protocols (Babel, BMX6, BATMAN-adv, OLSR, and IEEE802.11s) for supporting mobile mesh nodes. These investigations are of significant interest because the demand for seamless mobility has become imperative for the users. |
||
10 | |||
11 | Related experiments will be executed in w-iLab.t Zwijnaarde (iMinds) and Community-lab (UPC) Fed4FIRE testbeds because both of them support the configuration of wireless nodes similar to our standard deployments and are suitable to perform mobility tests. |
||
12 | |||
13 | h2. Concept and objectives |
||
14 | |||
15 | The main question we are seeking to answer with this experiment is (i) if and to what extend traditional IP-mobility solutions for wireless networks (like MIPv6) can be substituted with full-mesh based solutions and (ii) to what extend the existence of mobile nodes, and thereby introduced temporary and highly dynamic links, affects the end-to-end performance of stationary nodes. |
||
16 | |||
17 | To answer this question, the objective of this proposal is to analyze state-of-the-art routing protocol solutions regarding their capabilities for supporting topology dynamics caused by mobile mesh nodes. |
||
18 | The mobility support will be measured by means of the maximum amount of topology changes a protocol can handle while maintaining a continuous connection between (i) a mobile node and a stationary destination node and (ii) two stationary nodes which's possible end-to-end path include links via a mobile node. |
||
19 | The exact metric for ranking the mobility performance of a protocol is given by a reference experiments. In addition, relevant cost factors for achieving an identified mobility performance will be captured as needed for providing a fair analysis of each's protocol advantages and disadvantages. |
||
20 | |||
21 | The main objective of our concluding analysis is to provide benchmarking results and guidelines that allow to estimate and predict to some extend the feasibility for supporting a given use case with a particular routing protocol. |
||
22 | |||
23 | |||
24 | h2. Outlook |
||
25 | |||
26 | The project execution will officially start by June 1st and end by September 30 2014 |
||
27 | This wiki will be updated over time. |