Download In recent years, a cost effective Wireless Mesh Networks ( WMNs

JOURNAL OF INFORMATION, KNOWLEDGE AND RESEARCH IN ELECTRONICS
AND COMMUNICATION ENGINEERING
A SURVEY OF WIRELESS MESH NETWORKS: LAST-MILE
INTERNET CONNECTIVITY
1
M. ARIF SIDDIQUI, 2QAZI SHOEB AHMAD, 3M.H. KHAN
1
Faculty of Applied Sciences, Integral University, Lucknow, India
Faculty of Applied Sciences, Integral University, Lucknow, India
3
Department of Computer Science & Engineering
Institute of Engineering & Technology,
UP Technical University, Lucknow, India
2
1
[email protected]
ABSTRACT: Wireless Mesh Networks (WMNs) consists of mesh routers and mesh clients has emerged recently
to provide high speed last-mile internet connectivity anytime anywhere. The gateway and bridging
functionalities in mesh routers enable the WMNs to be integrated with other networks such as IEEE 802.11,
IEEE 802.15, IEEE 802.16 etc. WMN is going under rapid progress which would lead to provide better wireless
services in near future. This paper presents a detailed overview of architecture of WMN and its applications in
wireless local area networks (WLAN), wireless metropolitan area networks (WMAN), wireless personal area
networks (WPAN) and wireless sensor networks (WSNs). Finally, the advantages, constraints and possible
applications of WMNs have been discussed.
Keywords :Wireless Mesh Networks, Mobile Ad-Hoc Networks, Wireless Local Area Networks, Wireless
Metropolitan Area Networks, Wireless Personal Area Networks, Wireless Sensor Networks.
1. INTRODUCTION
In recent years, a cost effective multi-hop WMNs
has emerged to provide better services for high
speed last-mile connectivity anytime any where.
WMNs consists ad hoc distribution of mesh routers
and mesh clients [1]. Mesh routers are either
stationary or almost stationary wireless nodes and
forms the backbone of WMNs to provide the
network access to both the mesh and conventional
clients. While, the mesh clients are either stationary
or mobile, and form a client mesh network among
themselves and with other mesh routers.
In WMN, each node operates not only as host but
also as a router, forwarding packets on behalf of
other nodes that may not be within direct wireless
transmission range of their destination. Multi-hop
relaying helps to extend the radio coverage without
using costly base stations, improve the traffic
performance in given scenarios [2], reduce the
transmitting power of mesh clients and promote the
robustness of a network. A mesh router can be a
user terminal, performing the required computing
tasks, like a computer. However, it can also be a
very small device and put into a place simply for
increasing mesh connectivity or relaying traffic. In
addition to mesh networking among mesh routers
and
mesh
clients,
the
gateway/bridge
functionalities in mesh routers enable the
integration of WMNs with various other networks.
Conventional nodes equipped with wireless
network interface cards (NICs) can connect directly
to WMNs through wireless mesh routers.
Customers without wireless NICs can access
WMNs by connecting to wireless mesh routers
through, for example, Ethernet. Thus, WMNs will
greatly help users to be always-on-line anywhere,
anytime. Therefore, instead of being another type
of ad-hoc networking, WMNs diversify the
capabilities of ad-hoc networks. This feature brings
many advantages to WMNs, such as low up-front
cost, easy network maintenance, robustness,
reliable service coverage, etc.
WMNs can be applied in WLAN, WMAN, WPAN
and WSNs. Next generation WLANs, WMANs and
high speed WPANs are intended to offer high
quality multimedia communication services at low
cost in different scenarios. The development of
standards such as IEEE 802.11 [3], IEEE 802.15
(WPAN) [4], IEEE 802.16 (WMAN) [5] are
actively working on introducing multi-hop mesh
elements in their next generation standards.
Several research labs companies have already
realized the potential of this technology and started
building the test beds and offering wireless mesh
networking products. Recently, a number of test
beds [6], [7], [8], [9], [10] and industrial
implementations [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16],
[17], [18] have been established to carry out
ISSN: 0975 – 6779| NOV 09 TO OCT 10 | Volume 1, Issue 1
Page 16
JOURNAL OF INFORMATION, KNOWLEDGE AND RESEARCH IN ELECTRONICS
AND COMMUNICATION ENGINEERING
research and development for WMNs.. A number
of pilot mesh projects across the world (Freifunk
OLSR Experiment in Berlin, Germany [19], the
Dharamsala mesh in India [20] and Peebles Valley
in South Africa [21]) have also demonstrated that a
community can establish and maintain a wireless
mesh network and have access to a range of
modern information and communication services.
However, for a WMN to be all it can be,
considerable research efforts are still needed. For
example, the available medium access control
(MAC) and routing protocols are not scalable;
throughput drops extensively as the number of
nodes or hops in WMNs increases. The remaining
paper has been organized as follows:
In section 1.2 the architecture of WMNs has been
presented. In section 1.3, we have compared the
WMNs with MANETs. In section 1.4, we have
discussed the mesh networking concepts in IEEE
802.11, IEEE 802.15, and IEEE 802.16. Finally, in
section 1.5 and 1.6 the advantages, constraints and
applications have been discussed respectively.
2. NETWORK ARCHITECTURE
There are two types of nodes in a WMN called
mesh routers and mesh clients. Mesh clients can be
different kinds of user devices with wireless NIC,
such as PCs, laptops, PDAs, and mobile phones.
They have limited resources and capabilities in
terms of energy supply, processing ability, radio
coverage range, etc. Wireless mesh routers can be
access points (AP) of WLAN, sink nodes of
wireless sensor network, base stations (BS) of
cellular network. Mesh routers are usually much
more powerful than clients in terms of computation
and communication capabilities, and have
continuous power supply. They usually stay static
and supply connections and services for mesh
clients i.e. compared to conventional wireless
routers that perform only routing, mesh routers
have additional functionalities to enable mesh
networking. The architecture of WMNs can be
classified into three major categories based on
network topology [1]:
Infrastructure/backbone WMNs:
Figure 1.1 [1] shows an example of
infrastructure/backbone wireless mesh networks. In
the figure, mesh routers form a wireless mesh
topology that has self-configuration and selfhealing functions built into them. Some mesh
routers are designated as gateways which have
wired connectivity to the Internet. The integration
of other networking technologies is provided by
connecting the BS of the network that connects to
WMNs to the mesh routers. Here, the clients
communicate to the BS of its own network and the
BS in turn communicates to the mesh router to
access the WMN. Such a wireless multi-hop
backbone network provides the flexibility to
integrate WMNs with the existing wireless
communication systems. More than one gateway
can be added by simply connecting more base
stations to the Internet via wire line. Deploying
more gateways in the WMNs can improve not only
the network capacity but also the reliability. That
is, if one gateway fails, the traffic can be delivered
by alternative routes and gateways.
Client WMNs:
Figure 1.2 [1] shows an example of client wireless
mesh networks. In the figure, mesh clients form the
mesh topology to perform routing and
configuration functionalities. In client WMNs the
nodes generally uses one type of radio technology
on the devices to coordinate among themselves to
provide routing, network configuration, service
provisioning, and other application provisioning.
This architecture is very similar to wireless ad hoc
networks in which data packets gets transmitted
through multiple nodes to reach the destination.
Hybrid WMNs:
Figure 1.3 [1] shows an example of hybrid wireless
mesh networks which is combination of
infrastructure and client WMN. In hybrid WMNs,
mesh clients can perform mesh functions with other
mesh clients as well as accessing the network and
infrastructure/backbone provides the connectivity
to the other networks such as Wi-Fi, Worldwide
Interoperability for Microwave Access (WiMAX)
and sensor networks etc. These hybrid WMNs may
use multiple technologies for both backbone and
back haul. The hybrid WMN would be the most
useful in the future [1].
ISSN: 0975 – 6779| NOV 09 TO OCT 10 | Volume 1, Issue 1
Page 17
JOURNAL OF INFORMATION, KNOWLEDGE AND RESEARCH IN ELECTRONICS
AND COMMUNICATION ENGINEERING
Figure 1.1: Infrastructure/backbone WMNs
Figure 1.2: Client WMNs
Figure 1.3: Hybrid WMNs
3. WIRELESS
AD-HOC
V/S
MESH
NETWORKS
In ad hoc networks, all the nodes are assumed to be
mobile and there is no fixed infrastructure for the
network. These networks find applications where
fixed infrastructure is not possible, such as military
operations in the battlefield, emergency operations,
and networks of handheld devices. Because of lack
of infrastructure the nodes have to cooperate
among themselves to form a network. Due to
mobility of the nodes in the network, the network
topology changes frequently. So the protocols for
ad hoc networks have to handle frequent changes in
the topology. In most of the applications of ad hoc
networks, the mobile devices are energy
constrained as they are operating on battery. This
requires energy-efficient networking solutions for
ad hoc networks.
But in the case of WMNs, mesh routers are
assumed to be fixed (or have limited mobility) and
form a fixed mesh infrastructure. The clients are
mobile or fixed and utilize the mesh routers to
communicate to the backhaul network through the
gateway routers and to other clients by using mesh
routers as relaying nodes. These networks find
applications where networks of fixed wireless
nodes are necessary. There are several architectures
for mesh networks, depending on their
applications. In the case of infrastructure backbone
networking, the edge routers are used to connect
different networks to the mesh backbone and the
intermediate routers are used as multi-hop relaying
nodes to the gateway router, as shown in Figure
1.1. But in the case of community networking,
every router provides access to clients and also acts
as a relaying node between mesh routers. When
comparing ad hoc wireless networks and WMN,
we can summarize important differences as follow:

have a constant power source, while
WMN nodes have better energy storage and power
source due to the static topology, formed by fixed
relay nodes.

Deployment may be easy in ad-hoc
networks, while in WMN we may require planning.

For the application scenario, most ad-hoc
wireless networks are temporary, and WMN are
mostly semi-permanent or permanent. In addition,
WMNs can be used for both military and civilian
applications; an example is the provision of low
cost Internet services in public places.
4. MESH NETWORKING IN IEEE 802.11,
802.15, 802.16
The current and increasing interest in wireless
mesh technologies has led to the creation of
working groups (WG) as part of the standardization
activities. In these WGs, the study groups (SG) or
task groups (TG) are in charge of develop mesh
functionality for wireless local area networks
(IEEE 802.11s) [3], wireless personal area
networks (IEEE 802.15.5)[4], and wireless
metropolitan area networks (IEEE 802.16) [5].
ISSN: 0975 – 6779| NOV 09 TO OCT 10 | Volume 1, Issue 1
Page 18
JOURNAL OF INFORMATION, KNOWLEDGE AND RESEARCH IN ELECTRONICS
AND COMMUNICATION ENGINEERING
In this section, we describe these standards and
their goals as clear objectives that remark the
current needs and trends of wireless mesh networks
IEEE 802.11s
In September 2003, IEEE formed the 802.11s SG
which, in July 2004, became the “extended service
set (ESS) Mesh Networking” or 802.11s Task
Group (TGs), and it is the most advanced group of
the 802.11 WG. The current objective of this TG is
to apply mesh technology to WLANs by defining a
Wireless Distribution System (WDS) used to build
a wireless infrastructure with MAC-layer
broadcast/multicast support in addition to the
unicast transmissions. The TG should produce a
protocol
that
specifies
the
installation,
configuration, and operation of WLAN mesh.
Moreover, the specification should include the
extensions in topology formation to make the
WLAN mesh self-configure and self-organized,
and support for multi-channel, and multi-radio
devices. At the MAC layer, a selection path
protocol should be incorporated, instead of
assigning the routing task to the network layer
[22][23].
The WLAN Mesh architecture comprises the
following IEEE 802.11 based elements:

Mesh points (MP) which supports (fully
or partially) mesh relay functions, and implement
operations such as channel selection, neighbor
discovery, and forming and association with
neighbors. Additionally, MPs communicate with
their neighbors and forward traffic on behalf of
other MPs.

Wireless distribution system (WDS)
which is a collection of MPs, and serves similarly
to a Distribution System (DS) in a WLAN.

Mesh access point (MAP) which is a MP
but acts as an AP as well. Therefore,

MAPs can operate in a WLAN Mesh or as
part of legacy IEEE 802.11 modes.

Mesh point portals (MPP) are another kind
of MP that allows the interconnection of multiple
WLAN meshes to form a network of mesh
networks. Moreover, MPP can function as bridges
or gateways to connect to other wired or wireless
networks in the DS.
IEEE 802.15.5
In May 2004, the IEEE 802.15 WG formed the
Task Group 5 (TG5) with the objective of
developing a standard for WPAN further divided
into low rate mesh WPAN and high rate mesh
WPAN [4]. Mesh WPANs are small closed
wireless networks with a flat hierarchy which
generally do not have an Internet gateway, or APs.
For TG5, there are two types of applications: a)
low-rate applications such as sensor networks, and
b) high-rate applications such as control and
maintenance
applications,
and
multimedia
applications. TG5 develops a single “WPAN
Mesh” document for both types of applications, but
separate them when necessary TG5 shall provide
specifications for an architectural framework for
interoperable, stable, and scalable wireless mesh
topologies for WPAN devices [22]. The current
TG5 proposal defines a tree based approach named
adaptive robust tree (ART) which considers a mesh
tree routing approach, multicasting, and key
redistribution. In ART, each node maintains an
ART Table (ARTT) to track the tree branches
through assigned addresses. ART also defines three
phases:
a)
Initialization
or
configuration:
In
initialization phase, the ART tree is established
while nodes joint the network. This phase also
considers two additional stages association and
address assigning. In association, nodes gradually
joint the network starting in the root node of the
tree. While in address assigning, nodes indicate the
number of addresses they need built when the tree
is complete, and finally all nodes have an ARTT.
b)
Operation: In operation phase, nodes start
sending and receiving data. Reconfiguration may
also take place if more nodes join the network.
c)
Recovery: The recovery phase starts when
network is out of order for link failure or routing
node failure. In recovery phase only parts of the
tree can be reconstructed while other parts are still
operating properly. In this manner, the repair and
recovery may not need to reassign addresses to
nodes.
On top of the ART, a meshed ART (MART) is
formed in such a way that root nodes are connected
one to another. Therefore, root nodes treat each
other as child or leaf node in the local routing tree.
In this way, these nodes decide on which neighbor
to choose as next hop by using the tree previously
formed.
IEEE 802.16
In 1999, the IEEE established the IEEE 802.16 WG
on Broadband Wireless Access Standards which
aims to develop recommended practices and
standards to support the development and
deployment of broadband wireless metropolitan
area networks (WMAN)[5]. The official name for
the IEEE 802.16 family of standards is Wireless
MAN, but the industry named it as WiMAX which
basically, standardizes the physical (PHY) layer
and MAC sub layer. Currently, various
amendments are in progress, such as the case of
IEEE 802.16j amendment for Multi-hop Relay
Specification [24]. Then, the TG was formed in
March 2006 to work on wireless relay networks
(WRN) which bases on master-slave architecture.
ISSN: 0975 – 6779| NOV 09 TO OCT 10 | Volume 1, Issue 1
Page 19
JOURNAL OF INFORMATION, KNOWLEDGE AND RESEARCH IN ELECTRONICS
AND COMMUNICATION ENGINEERING
In IEEE 802.16j, a BS functions as an AP, and
controls the WMAN. Subscriber stations (SS) are
wireless nodes that synchronize to the BS and other
neighboring SSs in order to exchange frames via
the central BS, and forward data on request of its
BS. Also, IEEE 802.16j improves previous IEEE
802.16 standards by introducing relay stations
(RSs) which incorporates BS functionalities to
extend the coverage area by relaying traffic
between a SS and a BS or between other RSs or
between an RS and a BS. There are three types of
RSs:
1.Fixed relay station (FRS) which does not have
mobility.
2.Nomadic relay station (NRS) which has fixed
location for periods comparable to a user session.
3.Mobile relay station (MRS) that forwards data
even when being in motion.
Due to the increased interests, and low cost of
WMN, 802.16j is more likely to be successfully
deployed in the market. The FRS concept offers the
possibility to cheaply increase the range of BS.
5. ADVANTAGES AND CONSTRAINTS OF
WMNS
Advantages
There are many attractive features of WMN that
make them a viable networking solution in a
tactical environment. The multi-hop feature of
WMN enable all nodes to serve as routers or access
points, gives them several advantages over other
networking schemes. If the nearest AP or neighbor
is congested, a new route is formed to next closest
node with the least amount of traffic. This method,
known as hopping, is repeated until the data
reaches its destination. WMNs work on the same
principle as the Internet, which is just a wired
multi-hop network. When email is sent via the
Internet, the journey to the recipient involves hops
to many servers. The routes are mainly dependent
on network traffic density. The email may hop
from west to east and then back to west before
reaching its final destination in the Midwest. The
journey is much longer but more efficient and
faster.
One WMN advantage resulting from its multihopping phenomena is redundant continuous
communication links. Redundancy, in turn, brings
priceless reliability and availability that is required
in a tactical operation environment. The fact that a
WMN gets stronger when more and more nodes are
added results in the additional advantages of
scalability and robustness. By scalability, we mean
the WMNs ability to expand the number of nodes
without making major changes to the system or
application software. Because a WMN is not
dependent on the performance of any one node, it
is naturally robust. In WMN architecture, if a node
is unable to detect its routing neighbor, data will be
routed along an alternative path and WMN will
continue to function.
The other two important advantages of WMNs are
self-forming and self-healing. Self-forming of a
WMN enables quick and easy setup, which is
required in a tactical application. Self-forming is
made possible by the ad hoc mode, which enables
every node to form and join the mesh as soon as
they have power and a radio signal. Lastly, the selfhealing technique of WMN stands as the most
valuable benefit of WMN. As nodes enter and
leave the network, routing tables are continually
updated, and routes are recalculated [25].
Finally, the two most important advantages are non
line of sight (NLOS) and seamless communications
NLOS is a term used for communication between
transmitter and receiver where there is no direct
path for data transmission. Some obstacles are
there between transmitter and receiver. The
obstacles may be anything i.e. buildings, trees,
mountains etc. When transmitter sends any data, it
will reflect from these paths and then reaches the
receiver. However NLOS is extracted from the
term line of sight (LOS) which means that there is
direct communication between transmitter and
receiver, no obstacles will be there between them.
But in NLOS when data reaches the receiver from
different reflections it may experience a weak
signal at its end. This is known as fading. But
fading is no longer a very big problem these days.
It can be minimized or bring to that level up to
almost zero. To minimize/remove the signal fading
the most common way is to increase the strength of
a signal at the transmitter side and to increase the
bandwidth of that signal. Bandwidth is the range of
frequencies in a signal. Increasing the range of
frequencies will increase the bandwidth of a signal.
WMN is used for NLOS networks as it the best
suited option. WMN is a mesh network which uses
NLOS communication, so definitely during the
transmission of data from one end to another; the
data strength does not remain same when it reaches
to its destination. So WMN has the ability to
automatically configure and handle this kind of
problem also, it automatically increases the signal
strength to that level that it does not experience a
fade at receiver’s side. Because WMN has dozens
of nodes in it, and that is why these dozen of nodes
help to find a clear signal at the receiver side. No
other network has the ability to do this.
Seamless communication works on the basis of
always best connected anywhere anytime.
Definitely in a WMN there are many nodes, and
the goal of seamless is to always keep these nodes
connected whatever the change will occur. User
ISSN: 0975 – 6779| NOV 09 TO OCT 10 | Volume 1, Issue 1
Page 20
JOURNAL OF INFORMATION, KNOWLEDGE AND RESEARCH IN ELECTRONICS
AND COMMUNICATION ENGINEERING
should not be disconnected during the ongoing
communication. This offers handover (HO)
management and location management. HO
management means to keep nodes connected when
the position or direction will change. Location
management means that network will find from
where the node is connected to it. Since WMN is
best for NLOS networks, wirelessly connected
mobiles with some access points also come under
the category of NLOS communication. Because
signal from the base station experiences reflection
from different things and then reaches mobile node.
This means it is another advantage of WMNs that it
also provides seamless communication.
Constraints
Although wireless meshes show great potential for
use in military tactical environments, there are still
many issues facing its eventual DoD GIG
implementation. Some of the challenging problems
that still need to be addressed are coexistence,
interoperability, bandwidth prioritization, security,
and quality of service. In network centric warfare
environments, there will potentially be multiple
networks on the battlefield within radio range of
one another, the mesh network must be able to
coexist with surrounding networks with little of no
effect on network or sensor performance. To ensure
maximum battle readiness, we must develop a way
for competing tactical networks to cooperate
routinely, with a minimum manual intervention.
Another technical obstacle that must be addressed
is interoperability. The mesh must be able to
interface with numerous devices that have different
types of radios. A solution proposed by the Intel
Corporation is to put reconfigurable radios at the
device level that would allow for adaptation to
different wireless environments. This technique
would cost a lot less than putting multiple radios
each device [26].
Additionally, bandwidth prioritization also must be
addressed. Network transmissions are generated by
a variety of applications including; VoIP, video,
SA, encryption, and protocols. Each application
produces an assortment of data traffic patterns and
has different bandwidth requirements. A method
needs to be developed to automatically determine
which applications have bandwidth priority on the
network, and subsequently assign those priorities
appropriately.
Finally, the last and maybe most significant
wireless mesh constraint, is the matter of security
and privacy. If a mesh is to be truly valuable in
tactical situations, security has to become a vital
concern and not an afterthought. “Security is a vital
part of any wireless network and is an increasingly
important issue as adoption of last mile
technologies, such as mesh networking, mature and
become more widespread,” commented Wai Sing
Lee, a security consultant at Frost & Sullivan [27].
The mesh security solution must not add
unnecessary overhead to a network, in which
bandwidth is already at a premium. mesh security
has to be both, transparent and ubiquitous, in order
for this technology to reach its full potential.
All of the above issues have to be addressed in
order for wireless mesh technology to be fully
implemented into the network centric warfare
arena, which in turn will lead to the highest
available quality of service (QoS) for the sensors of
the tactical network.
6. APPLICATIONS OF WMNS
WMNs offer a wide scope of applications
including, but not limited to, providing broadband
internet access, sharing information on goods and
services, gaming, public safety, medical and
emergency response, valuable asset security,
neighborhood video surveillance, industrial
Monitoring. WMNs can also play an important role
in disasters reporting and emergency networking.
On the small scale [13], [14], such as home or
office, wireless mesh networking allows for
connections to the internet from anywhere, indoors
or outdoors, without wires. Access points are
placed in the transmission range of each other to
act as packet relays. Technologies such as IEEE
802.11b or IEEE 802.11a are used to provide
secure reliable, fast and wireless connectivity.
Computers with a wireless card can send and
receive data to each other and to the Internet. Small
scale WMNs can also be found in coffee shops,
hotels, airport lounges and other locations where
large crowds gather. WMNs can cover a
metropolitan area to provide broadband access
[15], [16], [17], [18].It provides lower upfront
investment cost and less deployment time than the
traditional wired network.
In general, wireless mesh networks are superior in
environments that match one or more of the
following criteria:

The coverage area is extensive, either
within a large building, or spanning a sprawling
campus or even wider geography

Coverage is required both indoors and
outdoors

The building or area is unwired or underwired, and lacks the infrastructure (raceways,
conduits, etc.) to readily overcome this limitation

Relatively few “line of sight” obstructions
exist, or existing obstructions can be circumvented
with one or two hops

The installation must be done quickly
and/or has a limited or temporary lifecycle such as
a move to another facility in the foreseeable future
ISSN: 0975 – 6779| NOV 09 TO OCT 10 | Volume 1, Issue 1
Page 21
JOURNAL OF INFORMATION, KNOWLEDGE AND RESEARCH IN ELECTRONICS
AND COMMUNICATION ENGINEERING
Rented facilities are a good example of
environments that make great candidates for
wireless mesh networks. The coverage area might
not be extensive, but it is owned by someone else.
Because all leasehold improvements remain with
the property, the cost to wire the facility may not
yield an adequate return on the investment. This is
particularly true in both brand new buildings where
wiring may not have been installed yet and in older
buildings where new cabling is very difficult to
pull.
Another area rich in good candidates for a wireless
mesh is specialty applications that may or may not
be permanent. For example, a wireless mesh can be
a cost-effective element of any disaster recovery
strategy. The mesh is easy to deploy, expand and
reconfigure as needed to mitigate anything from a
localized service outage to a more widespread and
serious emergency situation. The fast and friendly
self managing nature of a wireless mesh also make
it suitable for most “ad hoc” networking
requirements, such a trade show or other transitory
need.
7. CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, we have presented a comprehensive
study of wireless mesh networks and its
architecture. We have also discussed about possible
use of WMN in IEEE 802.11, IEEE 802.15, IEEE
802.16 and its applications.
8. REFERENCES
[1] I. F. Akyildiz, X. Wang, and W. Wang,
"Wireless mesh networks: a survey," Computer
Networks, vol. 47, pp. 445-487, 2005.
[2] R. Pabst, B. Walke, D. Schultz, et al.. Relaybased deployment concepts for wireless and mobile
broadband radio. IEEE Communications Magazine,
pp. 80-89, New York, USA, Sep. 2004.
[3] IEEE 802.11 Standard Group Web Site.
Available from: <http://www.ieee802.org/11/>.
[4] IEEE 802.15 Standard Group Web Site.
Available from: <http://www.ieee802.org/15/>.
[5] IEEE 802.16 Standard Group Web Site.
Available from: <http://www.ieee802.org/16/>.
[6] “Mesh network of carleton university.”
[Online].
Available:
http://kunzpc.
sce.carleton.ca/MESH/index.htm
[7] J. Bicket, S. Biswas, D. Aguayo, and R. Morris,
“Architecture and evaluation of an unplanned
802.11b mesh network,” International Conference
on
Mobile
Computing
and
Networking
(MobiCom), August 2005.
[8] "Mit roofnet project." [Online]. Available:
http:Hpdos.csail.mit.edu/roofnet/doku.php
[9] Politecnico di Milano MobiMESH. [Online].
Available: http:Hwww.elet.polimi.it/upload/antlab
[10] LIP6-UPMC RNRT Infradio Project. [Online].
Available:
http:Hrnrtinfradio.lip6.fr/indexEnglish.html
[11]
Nortel
Networks
website.”
http://www.nortelnetworks.com/solutions/wrlsmes
h/.
[12] “Cisco systems.” website: http://cisco.com
[13]“Belair
Networks
website.”
http://www.belairnetworks.com.
[14] “Intel Wireless Mesh Networks website.”
http://www.intel.com/update/contents/nc11032.htm
.
[15] “Microsoft’s Wireless Mesh Networks
website.” http://research.microsoft.com/mesh/.
[16]
“MeshNetworks
website.”
http://www.meshnetworks.com.
[17]
“Radiant
Networks
website.”
http://www.radiantnetworks.com.
[18]
“Tropos
networks
website.”
http://www.troposnetworks.com/
[19]
http://www.wizards-ofos.org/programm/specials/olsr_network_experimen
t.html
[20] http://drupal.airjaldi.com/node/56
[21]
http://www.fmfi.org.za/wiki/index.php/First_Mile_
First_Inch_Home_Page
[22] D.M Lee, M.J.; Jianliang Zheng; Young-Bae
Ko; Shrestha. Emerging standards for wireless
mesh technology. In Wireless Communications,
volume 13, pages 56 – 63. IEEE, April 2006.
[23] S.; Zhao R.; Denteneer D.; Berlemann L.
Hiertz, G. R.; Max. Principles of IEEE 802.11s. In
Computer Communications and Networks, 2007.
ICCCN 2007. Proceedings of 16th International
Conference on, pages 1002 – 1007. IEEE, 13 -16
August 2007.
[24] Wikipedia. IEEE 802.16. February 2008.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_802.16
[25] Conner, Steven and Gryder, Roxanne,
Technology @ Intel Magazine “Building a
Wireless World with MESH Networking
Technology”
<http://www.intel.com/update/contents/nc11032.ht
m> Last accessed November 2009
[26] Gelsinger, Pat, Intel, “Catching up with Radio
Free
Intel,”
<http://www.intel.com/technology/comms/cn09031
.htm> Last accessed November 2009
[27] VIA Technologies, INC, “VIA and
LocustWorld Secure Wireless MESH Networks
with VIA PadLock High-Speed Encryption,”
<http://www.via.com.tw/en/resources/pressroom/2
004_archive/-pr040923lw_secureMESH.jsp> Last
accessed November 2009
ISSN: 0975 – 6779| NOV 09 TO OCT 10 | Volume 1, Issue 1
Page 22