Problems in Ad Hoc channel Access

Taufeeq Malik
Lovely Professional University

Abstract In this term paper , I am going to discuss in

detail the various parameters related to An ad-hoc
network. Ad-hoc network is a self-organized and
distributed entity consisting of a number of mobile
stations (MS) without the coordination of any centralized
access point. Clustering is one of the fundamental
problems in ad hoc networks. In this context, we describe
a distributed clustering algorithm for multihop ad hoc
networks. We first propose a randomized control channel
broadcast access method to maximize the worst-case
control channel efficiency, based on which a distributed
clustering algorithm is proposed. Both theoretical
analysis and simulations indicate that the proposed
clustering algorithm takes much less time and overhead to
cluster a given network with more stable cluster
structure, while incurring very small maintenance
overhead in a dynamic resulting from the mobility of the
MS. Network. Three types of collision-free channel
access protocols for ad-hoc networks are presented.
These protocols are derived from a novel approach to
contention resolution that allows each node to elect
deterministically one or multiple winners for channel
access in a given contention context (e.g., a timeslot),
given the identifiers of its neighbors one and two
hopsaway. The new protocols are shown to be fair and
capable of achieving maximum utilization of the channel
bandwidth.The delay and throughput characteristics of
the contentionresolution algorithms are analyzed, and the
performance of the three types of channel access
protocols is studied by simulations
Introduction
In this term paper we are going to discuss about the
various problems faced in adhoc networks. Hidden
Terminal Problem in which Two nodes transmit
concurrently data to the same receiver which causes the
collision between the nodes. It can be prevented by using
control messages. Another problem faced in the ad-hoc
network is Exposed node problem in which overhearing
data transmission from neighboring nodes

take place. To overcome this problem we use separate

control and data channels or directional antennas.there
are many more problems faced in ad-hoc networks such
as Receiver-Initiated MAC protocols in which receiver
informs sender that it is ready to receive data but there
are possibilities that no way of knowing for sure that
sender has data to send.Other problem such as SenderInitiated MAC protocols in which sender informs receiver
it has data to send receiver confirms it is ready to receive
but control messages: RTS-CTS.

Problems in Ad Hoc Channel Access

Hidden Terminal Problem
This is a well-known problem found in contentionbased protocols, such as pure ALOHA, slotted
ALOHA, CSMA, IEEE 802.11, etc. Two nodes are
said to be hidden from one another (out of signal
range) when both attempt to send information to the
same receiving node, resulting in a collision of data
at the receiver node (see Figure 4.1).

Solution Hidden Terminal Problem

To avoid collision, all of the receiver's neighboring

nodes need to be informed that the channel will be
occupied. This can be achieved by reserving the
channel using control messages, that is, using a
handshake protocol. An RTS (Request To Send)
message can be used by a node to indicate its wish
to transmit data. The receiving node can allow this
transmission by sending a grant using the CTS
(Clear To Send) message. Because of the broadcast
nature of these messages, all neighbors of the sender
and receiver will be informed that the medium will
be busy, thus preventing them from transmitting and
avoiding collision. Figure 4.2 illustrates the concept
of the RTS-CTS approach.

Figure 4.2. Using an RTS-CTS handshake to

resolve hidden node problems
Shortcomings of the RTS-CTS Solution
The RTS-CTS method is not a perfect solution to
the hidden terminal problem. There will be cases
when collisions occur and the RTS and CTS control
messages are sent by different nodes. As shown in
Figure 4.3, node B is granting a CTS to the RTS
sent by node A. However, this collides with the RTS
sent by node D at node C. Node D is the hidden
terminal from node B. Because node D does not
receive the expected CTS from node C, it
retransmits the RTS. When node A receives the
CTS, it is not aware of any collision at node C and
hence it proceeds with a data transmission to node
B.

Figure 4.3. The incompleteness of the RTS-CTS method.

Another problematic scenario occurs when multiple

CTS messages are granted to different neighboring
nodes, causing collisions. As shown in Figure 4.4,
two nodes are sending RTS messages to different
nodes at different points in time. Node A sends an
RTS to node B. When node B is returning a CTS
message back to node A, node C sends an RTS
message to node B. Because node C cannot hear the
CTS sent by node B while it is transmitting an RTS
to node D, node C is unaware of the communication
between nodes A and B. Node D proceeds to grant
the CTS message to node C. Since both nodes A
and C are granted transmission, a collision will occur
when both start sending data.

Solution
A solution to the exposed node problem is the use of
separate control and data channels or the use of
directional antennas. The former will be discussed in
the PAMAS and DBTMA sections. Figure 4.6a
shows that a mobile node using an omni-directional
antenna can result in several surrounding nodes
being "exposed," thus prohibiting them from
communicating with other nodes. This lowers
network availability and system throughput.
Alternatively, if directional antennas are employed,
this problem can be mitigated. As shown in Figure
4.6b, node C can continue communicating with the
receiving palm pilot device without impacting the
communication between nodes A and B. The
directivity provides spatial and connectivity isolation
not found in omni-directional antenna systems.

Figure 4.4. Another illustration of the RTS-CTS

problem.
Exposed Node Problem
Overhearing a data transmission from neighboring
nodes can inhibit one node from transmitting to
other nodes. This is known as the exposed node
problem. An exposed node is a node in range of the
transmitter, but out of range of the receiver. This is
illustratedFigure4.5.

Figure 4.6. Using a directional antenna to resolve

the exposed node problem.

Receiver-Initiated MAC Protocols

While a MAC protocol can be categorized as willing to receive data from node A. If positive, it
synchronous or asynchronous in operation, it can returns a CTS message to node A. Node A then
also be distinguished by who initiates a subsequently proceeds to send data.
communication request. As shown in Figure 4.7, the
receiver (node B) first has to contact the sender
(node A), informing the sender that it is ready to
receive data. This is a form of polling, as the
receiver has no way of knowing for sure if the
sender indeed has data to send.

Existing Ad Hoc MAC Protocols

Multiple Access with Collision Avoidance
(MACA)

Sender-Initiated MAC Protocols

MACA was originally suggested by Phil Karn for

amateur packet radio networks. MACA aims to
create usable, ad hoc, single-frequency networks.
MACA was proposed to resolve the hidden terminal
and exposed node problems. It also has the ability to
perform per-packet transmitter power control, which
can increase the carrying capacity of a packet radio.

Contrary to receiver-initiated MAC protocols,

sender-initiated MAC protocols require the sender
to initiate communications by informing the receiver
that it has data to send. Examples of these senderinitiated protocols include MACA (Multiple Access
with Collision Avoidance), MACAW (MACA with
Acknowledgment), and FAMA (Floor Acquisition
Multiple
Access).
As shown in Figure 4.8, node A sends an explicit
RTS message to node B (the receiver) to express its
desire to communicate. Node B can then reply if it is

As shown in Figure 4.9, MACA uses a three-way

handshake, RTS-CTS-Data. The sender first sends
an RTS to the receiver to reserve the channel. This
blocks the sender's neighboring nodes from
transmitting. The receiver then sends a CTS to the
sender to grant transmission. This results in blocking
the receiver's neighboring nodes from transmitting,
thereby avoiding collision. The sender can now
proceed with data transmission. MACA has power
control features incorporated. The key characteristic
of MACA is that it inhibits a transmitter when a

This is also a passive form of initiation since the

sender does not have to initiate a request. In
addition, there is only one control message used,
compared to the RTS-CTS approach.

CTS packet is overheard so as to temporarily limit

power output when a CTS packet is overheard.

handshake, as shown in Figure 4.10. There is no

RTS. Instead, the CTS message is renamed as RTR
(Ready To Receive). In MACA-BI, a node cannot
transmit data unless it has received an invitation
from the receiver. Note that the receiver node does
not necessarily know that the source has data to
transmit. Hence, the receiver needs to predict if
indeed the node has data to transmit to it. The
timeliness of the invitation will, therefore, affect
communication performance.

Figure 4.9. An illustration of the control

handshake used in MACA

Figure 4.10. An illustration of MACA-BI control

handshake.

Collisions do occur in MACA, especially during the

RTS-CTS phase. There is no carrier sensing in
MACA. If two or more stations transmit an RTS
concurrently, resulting in a collision, these stations
will wait for a randomly chosen interval and try
again, doubling the average interval on every
attempt. The station that wins the competition will
receive a CTS from its responder, thereby blocking
other stations to allow the data communication
session to proceed.

The author suggested the estimation of packet queue

length and arrival rate at the source to regulate the
transmission of invitations. One possible way to
accomplish this is to piggyback such information
into each data packet so that the receiver is aware of
the transmitter's backlog. Hence, for constant bit
rate (CBR) traffic, the efficiency of MACA-BI will
be high since the prediction scheme will work fine.
However, for bursty traffic, MACA-BI performance
will be no better than MACA. To enhance the
MACA-BI (By Invitation)
communication performance of MACA-BI under
non-stationary traffic situations, a node may still
A shift from the classic three-way handshake MAC transmit an RTS if the transmitter's queue length or
protocol is MACA-BI (By Invitation). Invented by packet delay exceeds a certain acceptable threshold
Fabrizio Talucci, MACA-BI uses only a two-way before an RTR is issued.

Power-Aware Multi-Access
Signaling (PAMAS)

Protocol

with

Dual Busy Tone Multiple Access (DBTMA)

The use of a busy tone [18] was first proposed by

The Power-Aware Multi-Access Protocol with Professor Fouad Tobagi from Stanford University.
Signalling for ad hoc networks (PAMAS)[17] is He proposed Busy Tone Multiple Access (BTMA)
based on the MACA protocol with the addition of a to solve the hidden terminal problem. However,
separate signalling channel. RTS-CTS dialogue BTMA relies on a wireless last-hop network
exchanges occur over this channel. PAMAS architecture, where a centralized base station serves
conserves battery power by selectively powering off multiple mobile hosts. When the base station is
nodes that are not actively transmitting or receiving receiving packets from a specific mobile host, it
packets.
sends out a busy tone signal to all other nodes within
its radio cell. Hence, hidden terminals sense the busy
tone and refrain from transmitting.

(1) Figure 4.13. The principle of Dual Busy Tone

Multiple Access (DBTMA).

In PAMAS, nodes are required to shut themselves

off if they are overhearing other transmissions not
directed to them. In addition, each node makes an
independent decision about whether to power off its
transceiver. The conditions that force a node to
power off include:
a. If a node has no packets to transmit, it
should power off if one of its neighboring
nodes is transmitting.
b. If a node has packets to transmit, but at least
one of the neighboring nodes is transmitting
and another is receiving, then it should
power off its transceiver.

In DBTMA (Dual Busy Tone Multiple Access)[19]

[20], two out-of-band busy tones are used to notify
neighboring nodes of any on-going transmission. In
addition, the single shared channel is further split
into data and control channels. Data packets are sent
over the data channel, while control packets (such as
RTS and CTS) are sent over the control channel.
Specifically, one busy tone signifies transmit busy,
while another signifies receive busy. These two busy
tones are spatially separated in frequency to avoid
interference.

Conclusion
We discussed main issues of MAC layer and Routing
protocols of network layer. These two layers play most
important role in improving the performance of MANET.
The future is PERVASIVE MANET[12]. cross-layer
policies is a very promising direction, which can be
further explored. Cross-layering can tackle the traffic in
better manner on ad hoc networks by sharing information
from different layers . Moreover, information collected at
a particular layer (e.g., a route failure) can be exploited
by different layers to tune the protocol behavior. The
future of ad hoc networks is really appealing, giving the
vision
of
anytime,
anywhere
and
cheap
communications. Before those imagined scenarios come
true, huge amount of work is to be done in both research
and implementation. At present, the general trend in
MANET is toward mesh architecture and large scale.
Improvement in bandwidth and capacity is required,
which implies the need for a higher frequency and better
spatial spectral reuse. Propagation, spectral reuse, and
energy issues support a shift away from a single long
wireless link (as in cellular) to a mesh of short links (as in
ad hoc networks). Large scale ad hoc networks are
another challenging issue in the near future which can be
already foreseen. As the evolvement goes on, especially
the need of dense deployment such as battlefield and
sensor networks, the nodes in ad hoc networks will be
smaller, cheaper, more capable, and come in all forms. In
all, although the widespread deployment of ad hoc
networks is still year away, the research in this field will
continue being very active and imaginative. Future
research makes it possible to Imagine a wireless mesh of
rooftop-mounted ad hoc routers; an ad hoc network of
cars for instant traffic and other information; sensors and
robots forming a multimedia network that allows remote
visualization and control; multiple airborne routers (from
tiny robots to blimps) automatically providing
connectivity and capacity where needed like in a football
game; in an ad hoc network of spacecraft around and in
transit between the Earth and mars .These may seem like
science fiction, but a lot of work is in Process seriously
by the ad hoc research

Bibliography

http://www.jatit.org/volumes/researchpapers/Vol8No1/2Vol8No1.pdf
http://www.sandilands.info/sgordon/doc/jayasuriya2004hidden.pdf
https://www.google.co.in/webhp?sourceid=chromeinstant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF8#q=future%20scope%20of%20ad%20hoc%20network
http://rimtengg.com/coit2007/proceedings/pdfs/27.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_ad_hoc_network
http://www.journals.elsevier.com/ad-hoc-networks/
http://www.techterms.com/definition/adhocnetwork
http://www.slideshare.net/somarka/efficient-routediscovery-in-mobile-ad-hoc-network
http://technav.ieee.org/tag/72/ad-hoc-networks