Review of MACAW:A Media Access Protocol for Wireless LANs

From: Alan L. Liu (aliu@cs.washington.edu)
Date: Sun Nov 21 2004 - 21:41:45 PST

  • Next message: Tom Christiansen: "Bharghavan et al, 1994"

    The paper presents incremental changes to a media access protocol called
    MACA for wireless LANs that resolves some issues of fairness and
    bandwidth utilization.

    The paper identifies how traditional protocols are not suitable for
    WLANs because of wireless-specific problems. For example, the hidden
    terminal problem is caused by the fact that a node can only hear a
    subset of other nodes, although nodes it can't hear can also communicate
    with common base stations and therefore cause trouble. The exposed
    terminal problem is caused by simultaneous use of the spectrum being
    possible if two nodes talk to two different base stations. Carrier sense
    is not enough to overcome either of these. Therefore, a WLAN protocol
    must distribute the burden among both the senders and the receivers.
            Some clever tricks with sending control packets to avoid unfairness are
    described. The DS message enables those nodes who didn't hear the entire
    RTS-CTS exchange to know that the channel will be used, and also for how
    long. Without this, a node must be lucky in order to acquire the
    network, because its backoff time must fall right in the small time gap
    between long data transmissions.
            One interesting thing they introduced in WLAN was the use of ACKs for
    reliable transmissions, below the TCP layer. Apparently this is because
    recovery is so much faster from the link-layer. When the error rate of
    the medium is somewhat high, this achieves far greater throughput than
    without ACKs.
            One thing I found lacking about the paper's analysis of MACAW is that
    the paper gives no "typical" WLAN network attributes. It is hard to know
    whether the performance gain of using MACAW at 1% packet loss rate is
    worth the performance loss at 0.1%. I would have preferred that the
    paper gave some insights into the wireless characteristics before
    attempting to simulate such networks. Even better, real data could have
    been used. I understand that it is prohibitive to have actual
    implementations of link-layer protocols because of the need for part of
    it to go into hardware. This seems like it could be addressed by efforts
    like STP, so that hardware doesn't have to be the bottleneck for getting
    real data.
            One gaping hole in MACAW is that fairness is only ensured if all
    clients cooperate and have the correct implementation. The authors did
    not even consider rogue nodes. Although total prevention of a malicious
    person jamming the airwaves might be impossible, I feel that some
    consideration should have been made at least to robustness in the face
    of badly made implementations.

    It's funny how appropriate it was to write my Cerf and Kahn TCP/IP paper
    review and send it over TCP/IP to the mailserver. In the same vein, I
    happen to be writing this on my laptop which is "connected" using 802.11
    to the Internet. It works alright, but there are definitely some
    mysterious aspects of its performance that until reading this paper I
    only vaguely understood. The paper allowed me to appreciate some of the
    subtleties regarding wireless performance and sharing. Despite being
    more complicated than Ethernet, it has recently seen an exciting growth
    in bandwidth capability. Wireless usage is definitely here to stay and
    prosper.


  • Next message: Tom Christiansen: "Bharghavan et al, 1994"

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Sun Nov 21 2004 - 21:41:55 PST