Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
1 MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations? PhD Trial Lecture Erlend Larsen January 28th 2011 Erlend Larsen, PhD Trial Lecture 2011 Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 2 Outline • • • • • Rescue operations MANET TETRA Evaluation Conclusions Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 3 MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations? RESCUE OPERATIONS Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 4 Rescue operations • Rescue – Operations that usually involve the saving of life, or prevention of injury. • Performed by trained personnel in Rescue Squads – Independent or part of larger organizations like a fire, police, military, first aid squad, or ambulance services. Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 5 Types of rescue operations • • • • • • Car accidents Search and rescue Air plane crash Forest fires Hurricanes Earthquakes/ Tsunamis • ? Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 6 Scenario aspects communication • Where – Within existing infrastructure coverage? – Reachable by vehicles? (Boats, trucks, helicopter, etc.) – Moving or expanding disaster area? (Oil leakage, forest fire, search operation) • When – Preparation – Duration • Extent – Magnitude of the disaster – Needed equipment – Destroyed infrastructure Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 7 Communication services in rescue operations • Voice communication One-to-one and group communication • Data communication – – – – – – Short text and status messages Sensor information Database access Still pictures Streaming video Real-time video Increasing capacity demand Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 8 Radio communication challenges • Voice communication – Delay and jitter, and to some extent loss (QoS) • Data communication – Capacity • Reliability • Fairness and priority • Partitioning Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 9 MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations? MANET Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 10 MANET • Mobile Ad hoc NETworks • Layer 3 (Networking) concept • No single standardization body defines MANET: – IEEE 802.11 is a common PHY/MAC protocol – IETF MANET WG standardizes some routing protocols • Active research field Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 11 MANET - Details • IP-based Decentralized networking • Multi-hop communication without requirement for infrastructure • Autonomous mobile platforms with routing functionality (nodes) move freely and arbitrarily • Autoconfigurating and selfhealing network Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 12 MANET schematics Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 13 MANET – connected to infrastructure • MANETs can be connected to external networks • Connecting networks: – – – – – – – Satellite ADSL Mesh Ethernet GSM TETRA … • QoS-mapping can be a challenge Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 14 MANET – connected to infrastructure Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 15 MANET – Addressing communication challenges • Strengths: – Capacity for data communication – Partitioning • Weaknesses: – Voice communication – Reliability – Fairness and priority Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 16 MANET conclusion • Originates from computer networking • Intelligence in the nodes (routing) • Advantages: – – – – – Independent of infrastructure Low cost Rapid deployment Flexible High capacity • Disadvantages: – Immature – Multi-hop wireless communication poses QoS challenges – Dependent on infrastructure to reach HQ Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 17 MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations? TETRA Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 18 TETRA – TErrestrial Trunked RAdio • ETSI Standard for Private Mobile Radio, 1995• In widespread use for emergency and crisis communication – E.g., the new Norwegian Public Safety Radio Network • Compared to other mobile communication technologies: – – – – Faster call-setup Higher spectral efficiency Lower transmission frequency = wider coverage Flexibility of the working modes • One-to-one • One-to-many • Many-to-many Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 19 Schematics of TETRA Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 20 TETRA - Details • Fully digital communication system • Supported services – Voice – Circuit switched data – Packet switched data • TDMA based medium access • Switched infrastructure – (Proposal for TETRA-over-IP exists) • Security – Authentication – Air Interface Encryption – End-to-End Encryption TETRA base station for public safety services in The Netherlands Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 21 TETRA • 2 modes of operation – Trunked Mode of Operation (TMO) – Direct Mode of Operation (DMO) • TMO – – – – – Infrastructure-based Single wireless hop from terminal to base station Access to external networks, e.g, PSTN, ISDN, GSM Cell radius around 5 km Maximum data rate: 28.8 Kbps • DMO – Communication without reliance on infrastructure – Terminals share the channel using TDMA Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 22 TETRA-DMO • 4 operational modes: – Back-to-back – Direct communication – DM Repeater – Equipment to enlarge the DMO coverage – DM Gateway – Equipment to allow DMO equipment communication with the trunked system – DM Dual Watch – Equipment can operate in DMO or TMO and receive incoming calls on the other mode • The maximum data capacity in DMO is 7.2 Kbps • The maximum simultaneous calls is 2 (with Frequency Enhancing Mechanisms) Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 23 TETRA revision 2 • High speed data 30 – 400+ kbps: – TETRA Enhanced Data Service – TEDS • Compatible with TETRA 1 – TETRA Advanced Packet Service – TAPS • GPRS based overlay network • Increased capacity reduces the cell range Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 24 2 km ) TAPS in Belgium (30,000 – number of base stations Coding User Data Rate (per carrier) User Data Rate (per slot) Cell Radius Cell Area TETRA 1 28.8 7.2 5 km 78 km 2 MSC-5B 179.2 22.4 1.69 km 7.42 km 2 MSC-6A 236.8 29.6 1.44 km 5.39 km 2 MSC-7B 358.4 44.8 0.98 km 2.5 km MSC-8A 435.2 54.4 0.73 km 1.38 km 2 MSC-9A 473.6 59.2 0.56 km 0.81 km 2 2 Number of BS 380 4043 5565 12000 21739 37037 Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 25 TETRA – Addressing communication challenges • Strengths: – Voice communication – Reliability – Fairness and priority • Weaknesses: – Data communication – Partitioning Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 26 TETRA conclusion • Originates from telecom networks • Intelligence in the network • Advantages: – Mature – TDMA offers predictable service guarantee • Disadvantages: – – – – High cost Requires planning of base stations Dependent on infrastructure Low data capacity Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 27 MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations? EVALUATION Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 28 Competing technologies? - Do MANET and TETRA provide similar service? • Yes: – TETRA is a stand-alone emergency network, and: – There exist proposals for using MANET connected to external networks as a stand-alone emergency network. • No: – The differences between MANET and TETRA with regards to maturity and QoS make it hard to view MANET as a stand-alone emergency network. Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 29 Supplementing technologies? - Does employing both TETRA and MANET improve the service? • Yes: – TETRA has coverage (partitioning) problems in areas without infrastructure – The data capacity in TETRA is very low, and MANET could alleviate the need for using this capacity locally. – TETRA provides a reliable infrastructure for MANET. – Future scenario(?): TETRA 2 with fewer BS extended with MANET • No: Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 30 MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations? CONCLUSIONS Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 31 Conclusions • Communications systems for rescue operations must – Support voice and increasingly data communication • MANET and TETRA may be considered competing technologies: – MANET: Immature, but proposals exist • MANET and TETRA are supplementing technologies: – Dependence on infrastructure – Data capacity Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 32 References • • • • • • • • • • • • Luca Adamo, Romano Fantacci, Matteo Rosi, Daniele Tarchi, Federico Frosali, “Analysis and design of a TETRA-DMO and IEEE 802.11 integrated network,” IWCMC '10 Proceedings of the 6th International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing Conference Eli Winjum, Paal Spilling, Øivind Kure, ”Ad Hoc Networks Used in Emergency Networks: The Trust Metric Routing Approach,” Technical Report FFI, 2005 TETRA Association, http://www.tetramou.com Dirk Kuypers, Marc Schinnenburg, “Traffic Performance Evaluation of Data Links in TETRA and TETRAPOL,” Proceedings of European Wireless, 2005 A. K. Salkintzis, "Evolving public safety communication systems by integrating WLAN and TETRA networks," Communications Magazine, IEEE , vol.44, no.1, pp. 38-46, Jan. 2006 J. P. Macker and M. S. Corson, ”Mobile Ad Hoc Networking and the IETF,” Mobile Computing and Communications Review, vol.2, no.1, pp. 9-14, 1998 M. de Graaf et al., “Easy Wireless: broadband ad-hoc networking for emergency service,” The Sixth Annual Mediterranean Ad Hoc Networking WorkShop, Corfu, Greece, June 12-15, 2007 D. S. Sharp, “Adapting Ad Hoc Network Concepts to Land Mobile Radio Systems,” Master Thesis, Simon Fraser University, 2002 Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia, http://wikipedia.org Wikimedia Commons, http://commons.wikimedia.org R. Pinter, ”Introduction to TETRA Over IP (TOIP),” Simoco Digital Systems, 2008 Jo Dewaele, “User Requirements,” Presentation, TETRA TEDS Colloquium, ETSI, 2002 Erlend Larsen, “MANET and TETRA, competing or supplementing technologies for rescue operations?” 33 Thank You!