PACE: Simple Multi-hop Scheduling for Single-radio 802.11-based Stub Wireless Mesh Networks

IEEE 802.11-based Stub Wireless Mesh Networks (WMNs) are a cost-effective and flexible solution to extend wired network infrastructures. Yet, they suffer from two major problems: inefficiency and unfairness. A number of approaches have been proposed to tackle these problems, but they are too restrictive, highly complex, or require time synchronization and modifications to the IEEE 802.11 MAC. PACE is a simple multi-hop scheduling mechanism for Stub WMNs overlaid on the IEEE 802.11 MAC that jointly addresses the inefficiency and unfairness problems. It limits transmissions to a single mesh node at each time and ensures that each node has the opportunity to transmit a packet in each network-wide transmission round. Simulation results demonstrate that PACE can achieve optimal network capacity utilization and greatly outperforms state of the art CSMA/CA-based solutions as far as goodput, delay, and fairness are concerned

Survey on wireless technology trade-offs for the industrial internet of things

Aside from vast deployment cost reduction, Industrial Wireless Sensor and Actuator Networks (IWSAN) introduce a new level of industrial connectivity. Wireless connection of sensors and actuators in industrial environments not only enables wireless monitoring and actuation, it also enables coordination of production stages, connecting mobile robots and autonomous transport vehicles, as well as localization and tracking of assets. All these opportunities already inspired the development of many wireless technologies in an effort to fully enable Industry 4.0. However, different technologies significantly differ in performance and capabilities, none being capable of supporting all industrial use cases. When designing a network solution, one must be aware of the capabilities and the trade-offs that prospective technologies have. This paper evaluates the technologies potentially suitable for IWSAN solutions covering an entire industrial site with limited infrastructure cost and discusses their trade-offs in an effort to provide information for choosing the most suitable technology for the use case of interest. The comparative discussion presented in this paper aims to enable engineers to choose the most suitable wireless technology for their specific IWSAN deployment

A GA-based simulation system for WMNs: comparison analysis for different number of flows, client distributions, DCF and EDCA functions

In this paper, we compare the performance of Distributed Coordination Function (DCF) and Enhanced Distributed Channel Access (EDCA) for normal and uniform distributions of mesh clients considering two Wireless Mesh Network (WMN) architectures. As evaluation metrics, we consider throughput, delay, jitter and fairness index metrics. For simulations, we used WMN-GA simulation system, ns-3 and Optimized Link State Routing. The simulation results show that for normal distribution, the throughput of I/B WMN is higher than Hybrid WMN architecture. For uniform distribution, in case of I/B WMN, the throughput of EDCA is a little bit higher than Hybrid WMN. However, for Hybrid WMN, the throughput of DCF is higher than EDCA. For normal distribution, the delay and jitter of Hybrid WMN are lower compared with I/B WMN. For uniform distribution, the delay and jitter of both architectures are almost the same. However, in the case of DCF for 20 flows, the delay and jitter of I/B WMN are lower compared with Hybrid WMN. For I/B architecture, in case of normal distribution the fairness index of DCF is higher than EDCA. However, for Hybrid WMN, the fairness index of EDCA is higher than DCF. For uniform distribution, the fairness index of few flows is higher than others for both WMN architectures.Peer ReviewedPostprint (author's final draft