Advertisement

Suitability of MANET Routing Protocols for the Next-Generation National Security and Public Safety Systems

  • Pavel MasekEmail author
  • Ammar Muthanna
  • Jiri Hosek
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9247)

Abstract

One of new domains where the D2D communication can be applied is the Public Protection and Disaster Relief (PPDR) and National Security and Public Safety (NSPS) services. The key requirement for employing the PPDR and NSPS services is to provide the access to the communication services even if cellular network is highly overloaded or become fully dysfunctional due to some public disaster or emergency situations. In such case, the most important task is to share emergency information between citizens even when most of them do not have infrastructural connectivity. Since D2D is by default a single-hop communication, it is crucial to find the mechanism how to transmit any data via randomly assembled network even for longer distances. Therefore, this paper focuses on the utilization of MANET routing protocols for D2D communication in case that the connection to the cellular network is down. The selected routing protocols used in MANET are described and their suitability is verified in the simulation environment Network Simulator 3 (NS-3).

Keywords

AdHoc Cellular network D2D LTE MANET WiFi-Direct 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Kaufman, B., Aazhang, B.: Cellular networks with an overlaid device to device network. In: Proc. 42nd IEEE Asilomar Conf. Signals, Syst. Comput., Pacific Grove, CA, USA, pp. 1537–1541, October 2008Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Doppler, K., Rinne, M., Wijting, C., Ribeiro, C.B., Hugl, K.: Device-to-device communication as an underlay to LTE-advanced networks. IEEE Commun. Mag. 47(12), 42–49 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Fodor, G., et al.: Design aspects of network assisted device-to-device communications. IEEE Commun. Mag. 50(3), 170–177 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fitzek, F.H.P.: Cellular controlled short-range communication for cooperative p2p networking. In: Proc. Wireless World Res. Forum (WWRF) Contrib., pp. 141–155, November 2006Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Luo, H., Ramjee, R., Ramjee, R., Sinha, P., Li, L.E., Lu, S.: UCAN: A unified cellular and ad-hoc network architecture. In: Proc. MobiCom, San Diego, CA, USA, pp. 353–367, September 2003Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Vinel, A., Vishnevsky, V., Koucheryavy, Y.: A simple analytical model for the periodic broadcasting in vehicular ad-hoc networks. In: 2008 IEEE Globecom Workshops, GLOBECOM 2008 (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brahmi, N., Venkatasubramanian, V.: Summary on preliminary trade-off investigations and first set of potential network-level solutions. In: Proc. Eur. 7th Framework Res. Project METIS, October 2013. http://bit.ly/1LpmVhr
  8. 8.
    Delivering Public Safety Communications with LTE, 3GPP White Paper. http://3gpp.org/Public-Safety
  9. 9.
    Hovey, R. (ed.): Scenarios and requirements for general use cases and national security and public safety, 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP), 650 Route des Lucioles-Sophia Antipolis, France, Tech. Rep. 22.803, May 2013Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gerasimenko, M., Petrov, V., Galinina, O., Andreev, S., Koucheryavy, Y.: Impact of machine-type communications on energy and delay performance of random access channel in LTE-advanced. European Transactions on Telecommunications 24(4), 366–377 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chauhan, P., Vijay, S., Arya, P.: Comparative Analysis of Routing Protocols in AD-HOC Network: AODV, DSDV, DSR. International Journal of Current Engineering and Technology. ISSN 2277–4106Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Muthanna, A., Prokopiev, A., Paramonov, A., Koucheryavy, A.: Comparison of protocols for Ubiquitous wireless sensor network. In: 6th International Congress on Ultra Modern In: Telecommunications and Control Systems and Workshops (ICUMT 2014), pp. 334–337. October 2014Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Network Simulator 3: Discrete-event network simulator. NSNAM. http://www.nsnam.org
  14. 14.
    LENA: LTE-EPC Network simulAtor. CTTC. http://networks.cttc.es/mobile-networks/software-tools/lena/
  15. 15.
    Masek, P., Zeman, K., Hosek, J., Tinka, Z., Makhlouf, N., Muthanna, A., Novotny, V.: User performance gains by data offloading of LTE mobile traffic onto unlicensed IEEE 802. 11 links. In: Proceedings of the 38th International Conference on Telecommunication and Signal Processing, TSP 2015, pp. 1–5. Asszisztencia Szervezo Kft., Prague (2015). ISBN: 978-1-4799-8497-8Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Masek, P., Hosek, J., Dubrava, M.: Influence of M2M communication on LTE networks. In: Sbornik Prispevku Studentske Konference Zvule 2014, pp. 53–56, January 2014. ISBN: 978-80-214-5005-9Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Masek, P., Uhlir, D., Zeman, K., Masek, J., Bougiouklis, C., Hosek, J.: Multi- Radio Mobile Device in Role of Hybrid Node Between WiFi and LTE networks. International Journal of Advances in Telecommunications, Electrotechnics, Signals and Systems 4(2), 1–6 (2015). ISSN: 1805–5443CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yang, L., Liu, L., Mingju, L., Lan, C.: Uplink control for low latency HARQ in TDD carrier aggregation. In: 2012 IEEE 75th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring), pp. 1–5, May 6–9, 2012Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shivahare, B., Wahi, C., Shivhare, S.: Comparison Of Proactive And Reactive Routing Protocols In Mobile Adhoc Network Using Routing Protocol Property. International Journal of Emerging Technology and Advanced Engineering 2(3), 356–359 (2012). ISSN: 2250–2459zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Brno University of TechnologyBrnoCzech Republic
  2. 2.State University of TelecommunicationSt. PetersburgRussia

Personalised recommendations