Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
317959
Project acronym
MOTO
Project title
Advantage
Deliverable
number
D3.1
Deliverable name
Version
V 1.0
Work
package
Lead beneficiary
CNR
Authors
Nature
R Report
Dissemination level
PU Public
Delivery date
02/10/2013
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
Table of Contents
LIST
OF
FIGURES
........................................................................................................................................
5
LIST
OF
TABLES
..........................................................................................................................................
6
ACRONYMS
...............................................................................................................................................
7
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
..............................................................................................................................
8
1
INTRODUCTION
...................................................................................................................................
9
2
INVESTIGATIONS
ON
THE
CAPACITY
LIMITS
OF
LTE
............................................................................
12
2.1
LTE
MODULE
IN
NS3
..............................................................................................................................
12
2.1.1
Air
interface
................................................................................................................................
13
2.1.2
CQI
feedback
..............................................................................................................................
13
2.1.3
Propagation
model
.....................................................................................................................
13
2.1.4
Fading
model
..............................................................................................................................
14
2.1.5
Data
PHY
Error
Model
................................................................................................................
14
2.1.6
Adaptive
Modulation
and
Coding
..............................................................................................
14
2.1.7
Resource
Allocation
model
........................................................................................................
14
2.1.7.1
Round
Robin
(RR)
................................................................................................................
15
2.1.7.2
Proportional
Fair
(PF)
..........................................................................................................
15
2.1.7.3
Maximum
Throughput
(MT)
...............................................................................................
15
2.1.7.4
Throughput
to
Average
(TTA)
.............................................................................................
16
2.1.7.5
Blind
Average
Throughput
(BAT)
........................................................................................
16
2.1.7.6
Priority
Set
(PS)
...................................................................................................................
16
2.2
CAPACITY
LIMITS
IN
LTE
NETWORKS
..........................................................................................................
17
2.2.1
Results
in
pedestrian
environments
...........................................................................................
17
2.2.2
Results
in
vehicular
environments
.............................................................................................
20
3
THE
PUSH&TRACK
SYSTEM
AS
A
TECHNIQUE
FOR
OPPORTUNISTIC
OFFLOADING
..............................
23
3.1
HIGH
LEVEL
OPERATION
OF
PUSH&TRACK
..................................................................................................
23
3.2
SUBSET
SELECTION
.................................................................................................................................
24
3.3
WHEN
TO
PUSH
.....................................................................................................................................
24
3.3.1
Fixed
Objective
Function
............................................................................................................
24
3.3.2
Derivative-based
Re-injection
(DROiD)
......................................................................................
25
3.3.2.1
Motivation
..........................................................................................................................
26
3.3.2.2
Re-injection
strategy
...........................................................................................................
26
3.4
RESULTS
...............................................................................................................................................
27
3.4.1
Evaluation
Setup
........................................................................................................................
27
3.4.2
Fixed
Objective
Function
............................................................................................................
28
3.4.3
Derivative-based
Re-injection
(DROiD)
......................................................................................
29
4
THROUGHPUT
ANALYSIS
OF
OPPORTUNISTIC
NETWORK
PROTOCOLS
...............................................
31
4.1
CONVERGENCE
OF
FORWARDING
PROTOCOLS
IN
OPPORTUNISTIC
NETWORKS
....................................................
32
MOTO
Consortium
2013
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
List of Figures
Figure
1.
Reference
MOTO
networking
environment.
......................................................................................
9
Figure
2.
Example
of
a
space-time
path.
...........................................................................................................
9
Figure
3:
Total
throughput
of
a
single
LTE
cell
as
a
function
of
the
distance
of
the
tagged
UE
from
the
eNB.
A
variable
number
N
of
UEs
is
uniformly
distributed
in
the
cell.
Downlink
traffic
flows
are
saturated.
...
18
Figure
4:
Throughput
fairness
of
a
single
LTE
cell
as
a
function
of
the
distance
of
the
tagged
UE
from
the
eNB.
A
variable
number
N
of
UEs
is
uniformly
distributed
in
the
cell.
Downlink
traffic
flows
are
saturated.
...............................................................................................................................................
19
Figure
5:
Throughput
perceived
by
the
a
tagged
UE
as
a
function
of
the
distance
of
the
tagged
UE
from
the
eNB.
A
variable
number
N
of
UEs
is
uniformly
distributed
in
the
cell.
Downlink
traffic
flows
are
saturated.
...............................................................................................................................................
20
Figure
7:
LTE
link
capacity
measured
by
a
single
mobile
UE
for
different
speeds
..........................................
21
Figure
8:
Spatial
distribution
of
per-UE
throughput
for
a
node
density
of
2
UEs
per
km
...............................
21
Figure
9:
Spatial
distribution
of
per-UE
throughput
for
a
node
density
of
10
UEs
per
km
.............................
22
Figure
10:
Scatter
plot
of
average
values
and
coefficients
of
variation
of
the
throughputs
obtained
by
each
mobile
UE
for
two
node
densities.
.........................................................................................................
22
Figure
11:
High
level
operation
of
Push&Track
...............................................................................................
22
Figure
12:
Infection
rate
objective
functions.
x
is
the
fraction
of
time
elapsed
between
a
messages
creation
and
expiration
dates.
x
=
1
is
the
deadline
for
achieving
100%
infection.
.............................................
24
Figure
13:
Discrete
time
slope
detection
performed
by
Push&Track.
For
clarity
we
consider
the
content
creation
time
t0
=
0.
................................................................................................................................
25
Figure
14:
1-minute
delay:
average
offload
ratio
for
different
combinations
of
whom
and
when
strategies,
three
different
participation
rates
are
considered.
The
rows
correspond,
from
top
to
bottom,
to
the
following
whom
strategies:
Random,
Connected
Components,
Entry-Oldest,
Entry-Average,
Entry-
Newest,
GPS-Density,
and
GPS-Potential.
The
columns
represent
the
following
when
strategies,
from
left
to
right:
Single
Copy,
Ten
Copies,
Quadratic,
Slow
Linear,
Linear,
Fast
Linear,
and
Square
Root.
...
28
Figure
15:
Offloading
efficiency
for
different
re-injection
schema.
Different
maximum
reception
delays
for
messages
are
considered.
......................................................................................................................
29
Figure
16:
Infrastructure
vs.
ad
hoc
load
per
message
sent
using
the
Infra,
the
Oracle,
and
the
DROiD
strategies.
Different
maximum
reception
delays
for
messages
are
considered.
...................................
30
Figure
17.
Example
of
delays
with
different
forwarding
strategies.
...............................................................
34
Figure
18.
Semi-Markov
chain
for
the
general
delay
modelling
framework.
..................................................
36
Figure
19.
Scenario
1
(left)
and
2
(right).
........................................................................................................
37
Figure
20.
Distribution
of
the
delay
in
Scenario
1
(exponential
mobility).
......................................................
38
Figure
21.
Distribution
of
the
delay
in
Scenario
2
(exponential
mobility).
......................................................
39
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
List of Tables
Table
1:
Acronyms
.............................................................................................................................................
7
Table
II:
Main
simulation
parameters
.............................................................................................................
17
Table
3.
Summary
of
forwarding
strategies.
...................................................................................................
33
Table
4.
Convergence
conditions.
...................................................................................................................
33
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
Acronyms
Table
1:
Acronyms
Acronym
Meaning
AAA
AMC
CQI
eNB
HARQ
MAC
MCS
MIMO
OFDM
PDCP
RB
Resource Block
RBG
RLC
RRC
RRM
TTI
UE
User Equipment
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
Executive
summary
This
deliverable
provides
a
first
set
of
enabling
concepts,
techniques
and
models
for
capacity
improvements
of
wireless
infrastructures
through
mobile
data
traffic
offloading.
Specifically,
we
present
initial
results
obtained
in
the
first
7
months
of
WP3
activities
(M4
to
M11),
along
three
main
lines.
The
first
one
is
an
investigation
into
the
capacity
limits
of
the
LTE
technology.
This
clearly
shows
that
there
are
common
cases
where
LTE
users
will
experience
a
throughput
likely
unsuitable
to
support
modern
forms
of
data-oriented
multimedia
applications.
Besides
providing
initial
yet
numerical
evidence
about
capacity
limitations
of
LTE,
this
also
provides
a
clear
case
for
the
overall
MOTO
concept
of
offloading
through
opportunistic
networking
techniques.
In
the
second
part
we
present
an
initial
solution
for
exploiting
the
capacity
available
in
opportunistic
networks
in
presence
of
an
LTE
infrastructure,
i.e.
the
Push&Track
system.
Push&Track
provides
a
practical
technique
to
improve
capacity
through
offloading.
Therefore,
it
shows
a
concrete
example
of
the
aspects
that
need
to
be
analysed
and
modelled
to
correctly
design
an
offloading
system.
Modelling
one
of
those
aspects
is
the
main
objective
of
the
third
line
reported
in
this
document.
Specifically,
we
describe
a
stochastic
model
to
describe
the
expected
delay
and
number
of
hops
of
a
set
of
reference
forwarding
protocols
used
in
opportunistic
networks.
As
explained
in
the
following
of
the
deliverable,
the
expected
delay
is
the
main
parameter
determining
the
throughput
perceived
by
users.
Thus,
it
allows
us
to
characterise
the
capacity
available
(in
terms
of
throughput)
to
users
when
data
is
disseminated
through
an
opportunistic
network.
Overall,
none
of
these
three
lines
has
provided
final
results,
yet.
This
was
anticipated,
and
appropriate
considering
the
time
span
of
the
activities
described
in
this
deliverable.
However,
all
of
them
provide
significant
initial
results
that
both
(further)
motivate
the
investigation
of
the
MOTO
offloading
concept,
and
provide
initial
tools
for
the
design
of
effective
offloading
protocols.
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
1 Introduction
In
this
deliverable
we
start
analysing
key
concepts
to
characterise
foundational
aspects
of
offloading
in
the
reference
MOTO
networking
environments.
In
particular,
this
deliverable
reports
activities
related
to
characterising
the
capacity
properties
of
the
reference
MOTO
network.
For
the
readers
convenience,
Figure
1
shows
a
conceptual
representation
of
the
environment
we
consider.
Figure
1.
Reference
MOTO
networking
environment.
Among
the
various
challenges
of
this
environment,
one
of
the
most
interesting
is
characterising
the
capacity
gain
that
can
be
achieved
when
traffic
is
offloaded
from
a
wireless
infrastructure
(and
in
particular
from
LTE)
to
an
opportunistic
network,
i.e.
a
network
where
communication
happens
due
to
direct
encounter
between
user
devices.
Opportunistic
networks
[32]
are
mobile
self-organizing
networks
where
the
existence
of
a
continuous
multihop
path
formed
by
simultaneously
connected
hops
is
not
taken
for
granted.
To
deliver
a
message
from
a
source
to
a
destination,
in
opportunistic
networks
it
is
required
that
a
space-time
multihop
path
exists
[21]
(see
Figure
2
for
a
graphical
example).
Due
to
users
mobility
and
network
reconfigurations,
different
portions
of
a
space-time
path
can
become
available
at
different
points
in
time.
For
example,
in
Figure
2
node
2
moves
close
to
node
3
at
time
t2,
while
node
5
moves
close
to
the
destination
at
time
t3,
thus
establishing
a
space-time
path
between
nodes
S
and
D.
Intermediate
nodes
in
space-time
paths
exploit
the
store-carry-and-forward
concept
[17][28]:
They
temporarily
store
messages
addressed
to
a
currently
unreachable
destination
(if
better
next
hops
are
currently
not
available),
until
a
new
portion
of
the
space-time
path
appears,
and
therefore
the
message
can
progress
toward
the
final
destination.
Figure
2.
Example
of
a
space-time
path.
MOTO
Consortium
2013
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
To
be
able
to
characterise
the
capacity
of
the
integrated
network,
several
steps
are
needed.
In
this
document
we
report
initial
activities
of
the
work
package,
aimed
at
three
main
goals.
The
first
one
is
to
understand
the
capacity
limits
of
LTE
network,
perceived
by
individual
users.
When
finally
achieved,
this
will
allow
us
to
have
a
clear
picture
about
the
configurations
of
users
spatio-temporal
distributions
that
require
capacity
enhancements
through
opportunistic
networks.
The
second
one
is
identifying
a
reference
solution
for
a
complete
MOTO
solution.
This
allows
us
to
start
investigating
some
aspects
of
the
capacity
gain
that
can
be
achieved
through
offloading,
and
to
have
practical
indications
on
which
aspects
are
more
important
to
focus
on
to
understand
and
fully
characterise
these
capacity
gains.
The
third
one,
is
investigating
the
capacity
available
in
opportunistic
networks
in
isolation.
This
deliverable
reports
the
status
of
the
MOTO
WP3
activities
along
these
three
lines
of
research.
Note
that,
we
consider
capacity
as
the
throughput
perceived
by
individual
users
of
the
network,
as
well
as
the
entire
cell,
rather
than
as
the
capacity
of
the
network
in
terms
of
information
theory.
This,
in
our
opinion,
is
more
appropriate
to
derive
results
of
practical
applicability,
as
the
former
is
one
of
the
key
elements
of
the
network
performance
perceived
by
the
users,
and
thus
of
the
resulting
Quality
of
Experience.
Also
note
that
these
results
mainly
come
from
the
work
of
Task
3.2.
Work
has
been
also
carried
out
in
Task
3.1
and
3.3,
which
will
be
reported
in
the
corresponding
scheduled
deliverable
of
the
WP.
The
following
three
sections
are
devoted
to
each
of
these
lines.
Specifically,
in
Section
2
we
present
the
initial
results
we
have
obtained
about
the
limits
of
LTE
capacity.
We
have
used
the
reference
simulation
platform
of
the
project,
NS3,
in
order
to
start
an
extensive
simulation-based
measurement
campaign.
We
aim
at
highlighting
the
limits
of
LTE
(in
terms
of
throughput
experienced
by
a
tagged
user,
as
well
as
of
overall
cell
throughput)
in
some
of
the
scenarios
identified
in
WP2
of
the
project
(e.g.,
crowds
and
vehicular
enviroenments).
Specifically,
up
to
now
we
have
considered
the
performance
of
static
users
in
a
single
cell,
with
respect
to
the
number
of
users
served
by
the
same
eNB
and
to
the
scheduling
algorithm
executed
by
the
eNB.
We
have
then
started
considering
mobile
vehicular
environments,
to
understand
the
performance
when
users
move
across
multiple
eNBs,
populated
with
a
number
of
other
users.
Our
results
confirm
that
enforcing
throughput
fairness
among
the
users
in
a
cell
and
maximizing
the
cell
throughput
are
two
contrasting
objectives,
and
a
trade-off
is
generally
sought
by
the
operator
when
implementing
a
radio
resource
allocation
strategy
at
the
eNB.
Furthermore,
our
results
already
highlight
some
interesting
properties
and
cases
where
the
LTE
network
alone
does
not
provide
acceptable
throughput
to
the
user,
considering
the
likely
demands
in
terms
of
data
traffic.
Specifically,
as
expected
the
throughput
perceived
by
a
tagged
user
is
highly
dependent
on
the
quality
of
the
wireless
link
between
the
tagged
user
and
the
eNB.
In
fact,
when
the
tagged
user
is
close
to
the
eNB
it
generally
obtains
a
stable
throughput.
On
the
other
hand,
after
a
critical
distance,
throughput
performance
falls
steeply.
In
addition,
the
exact
throughput
behaviour
of
a
tagged
user
depends
in
a
complex
manner
on
a
variety
of
factors
beyond
channel
conditions,
including
the
history
of
perceived
throughputs.
Section
3
deals
with
the
second
line
of
research.
We
have
considered
the
Push&Track
system
(originally
proposed
by
some
of
the
MOTO
partners
in
[43]),
as
a
practical
solution
for
integrating
wireless
infrastructures
with
opportunistic
networks.
In
this
context,
we
present
the
overall
Push&Track
system
architecture.
In
addition,
we
discuss
two
adaptive
re-injection
strategies
to
fine
control
the
pace
at
which
contents
are
disseminated.
Results
presented
in
this
document
show
that
such
a
solution
can
efficiently
be
implemented.
The
integration
between
LTE
and
opportunistic
networks
provides
to
the
users
the
benefit
of
both
worlds,
e.g.
the
possibility
of
offloading
part
of
the
traffic
from
possibly
congested
LTE
networks,
without
losing
the
timeliness
of
delivery
(when
needed)
that
cannot
be
guaranteed
in
conventional
opportunistic-only
offloading
strategies.
We
have
used
a
simplified
simulator
to
abstract
the
LTE
protocol
stack,
in
order
to
properly
focus
on
the
important
factors
influencing
message
propagation.
In
particular,
we
show
through
simulation
that
Push&Track
is
able
to
save
more
than
50%
of
the
LTE
traffic,
even
in
the
case
of
tight
delivery
constraints
(in
the
order
of
few
minutes
or
less).
Section
4
presents
the
initial
results
we
have
obtained
to
characterise
the
capacity
of
opportunistic
networks.
In
this
case
we
aim
at
deriving
analytical
models
of
the
throughput
in
opportunistic
networks,
so
as
to
obtain
analytical
tools
to
understand
the
capacity
gain
in
an
integrated
network
(note
that
one
of
the
MOTO
Consortium
2013
10
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
next
steps
planned
for
the
analysis
of
LTE
is
deriving
similar
analytical
models).
We
discuss
the
two
main
overall
aspects
that
need
to
be
considered
from
this
standpoint.
First
of
all,
we
consider
the
problem
of
convergence,
i.e.
the
possibility
that
the
expected
delay
of
messages
from
source
to
destination
can
be
infinite.
As
discussed
in
Section
4
this
is
a
possible
case,
and
practically
means
that
messages
can
be
trapped
in
relays
from
which
they
cannot
exit,
based
on
the
forwarding
policy
used.
Although
we
are
working
on
this
topic
in
the
framework
of
MOTO,
we
have
not
yet
obtained
original
results
to
present.
Therefore,
we
present
the
main
background
results
we
have
obtained
before,
to
describe
the
starting
point
from
where
we
move
on
inside
MOTO.
Then,
we
present
original
results
that
provide
an
analytical
model
of
the
delay
achieved
by
messages
in
a
number
of
mobility
settings
and
with
a
range
of
forwarding
protocols.
As
discussed
in
Section
4,
characterising
the
delay
is
the
most
important
aspect
in
order
to
derive
models
for
the
throughput.
We
have
been
able
to
derive
a
model
providing
closed
form
expressions
for
the
delay
in
heterogeneous
mobility
settings
(i.e.,
when
the
characteristics
of
the
contact
patterns
between
nodes
change
across
different
pair
of
nodes),
and
with
different
types
of
routing
(representative
of
State-of-the-
Art
solutions
in
the
literature).
Using
this
model,
we
have
been
able
to
characterise
the
delay
of
the
protocols
in
these
settings,
highlighting
the
reasons
why
some
protocols
behave
better
or
worse
than
the
others.
This
analysis
shows
examples
of
how
our
model
can
be
used
in
practice.
Finally,
Section
5
discusses
the
main
directions
of
future
work
in
the
work
package
related
to
these
activities.
11
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
12
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
13
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
BER = 0.00005
ln(5 BER)
1.5
$ '
i = log 2 &1+ i )
% (
=
The
procedure
described
in
[10]
is
used
to
get
the
corresponding
modulation-and-coding
scheme
(MCS)
for
the
downlink.
The
spectral
efficiency
is
quantized
based
on
CQI
samples,
rounding
to
the
lowest
value,
and
is
mapped
to
the
corresponding
MCS
scheme.
Specifically,
the
MAC
scheduler
receives
CQI
reports
from
all
UEs
in
the
cell
based
on
their
measurements
of
the
downlink
channel.
The
reported
CQI
is
a
number
between
0
(worst)
and
15
(best)
indicating
the
most
efficient
MCS
which
would
give
a
Block
Error
Rate
(BLER)
of
10%
or
less.
2.1.7 Resource
Allocation
model
The
packet
scheduler
implemented
at
the
eNB
is
the
crucial
function
of
the
resource
allocation
model
because
it
is
in
charge
of
assigning
portions
of
spectrum
shared
among
users
within
each
frame,
by
following
specific
policies.
Specifically,
the
scheduler
generates
special
control
messages,
called
Downlink
Control
Information
(DCI),
which
indicates
the
resource
allocation
for
each
user.
The
information
in
DCIs
include:
i)
an
allocation
bitmap
which
identifies
which
RBs
will
contain
the
data
transmitted
by
the
eNB
to
each
user;
ii)
the
Modulation
and
Coding
Scheme
(MCS)
to
be
used
in
each
RB;
and
iii)
the
MAC
transport
block
size.
Note
that
LTE
supports
three
different
ways
for
allocating
RBs
or
RBGs
in
downlink
grants.
At
the
MOTO
Consortium
2013
14
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
time
of
writing,
the
LTE
simulation
implements
only
the
Type
0
resource
allocation,
which
uses
a
bitmap
of
RBGs,
where
the
RBG
size
is
a
function
of
the
channel
bandwidth.
RBGs
may
be
allocated
from
across
the
full
channel
bandwidth.
Allocated
RGBs
are
not
required
to
be
contiguous.
Many
different
schedulers
have
been
proposed
for
LTE,
but
most
of
them
cannot
be
deployed
in
real
systems
due
to
both
the
difficulty
to
be
implemented
in
real
devices
and
the
high
computational
cost
required.
For
these
reasons,
only
a
subset
of
existing
schedulers
has
been
included
in
the
LTE
simulation
model
[1][11].
In
the
following,
we
describe
the
features
of
the
most
relevant
ones,
which
have
been
evaluated
in
the
simulations.
First
of
all,
let
us
introduce
some
useful
notation
that
will
be
used
in
the
following
sections.
Let
i,
j
denote
generic
users,
t
be
the
subframe
index,
and
k
be
the
resource
block
index;
let
Mi,k(t)
be
MCS
usable
by
user
i
on
resource
block
k
according
to
what
reported
by
the
AMC
model;
finally
let
S(M,B)
be
the
TB
size
in
bits
as
defined
in
[6]
for
the
case
where
a
number
B
of
resource
blocks
is
used.
Then,
the
achievable
rate
Ri(k,
t)
in
bit/s
for
user
i
on
resource
block
group
k
at
subframe
t
is
defined
as
Ri(k,
t)
=
S(Mi,k(t),1)/TTI.
2.1.7.1 Round
Robin
(RR)
The
RR
scheduler
is
the
simplest
channel-unaware
scheduler
supported
in
the
LTE
module.
It
works
by
dividing
the
available
resources
among
the
active
flows,
i.e.,
those
logical
channels
that
have
a
non-empty
RLC
queue.
If
the
number
of
RBGs
is
greater
than
the
number
of
active
flows,
all
the
flows
can
be
allocated
in
the
same
subframe.
Otherwise,
if
the
number
of
active
flows
is
greater
than
the
number
of
RBGs,
not
all
the
flows
can
be
scheduled
in
a
given
subframe;
then,
in
the
next
subframe
the
allocation
will
start
from
the
last
flow
that
was
not
allocated.
The
MCS
to
be
adopted
for
each
user
is
done
according
to
the
received
wideband
CQIs.
2.1.7.2 Proportional
Fair
(PF)
Thanks
to
CQI
feedbacks,
which
are
periodically
sent
(from
UEs
to
the
eNB)
using
ad
hoc
control
messages,
the
scheduler
can
estimate
the
channel
quality
perceived
by
each
UE;
hence,
it
can
predict
the
maximum
achievable
throughput.
As
explained
above,
Ri(k,
t)
is
the
achievable
expected
for
the
user
i
at
the
t-th
TTI
over
the
k-th
resource
block
group.
Let
Ti(t)
be
the
past
throughput
performance
perceived
by
the
user
i,
which
is
determined
at
the
end
of
the
subframe
t
using
an
exponential
moving
average
approach
(more
details
can
be
found
in
[1]).
Finally,
at
the
start
of
each
subframe
t,
each
RBG
k
is
assigned
to
the
user
ik(t)
by
solving
the
following
optimization
problem
! R (k, t) $
&&
ik (t) = argmax ## j
j=1,,N " T j (t) %
In
other
words,
the
PF
scheduler
uses
the
past
average
throughput
as
a
weighting
factor
of
the
expected
data
rate,
so
that
users
in
bad
conditions
will
be
surely
served
within
a
certain
amount
of
time.
The
scaling
factor
used
in
the
moving
average
estimator
of
the
past
throughput
determines
the
time
window
over
which
fairness
wants
to
be
imposed.
2.1.7.3 Maximum
Throughput
(MT)
The
scheduling
strategy
known
as
MT
aims
at
maximizing
the
overall
throughput
by
assigning
each
RBG
to
the
user
that
can
achieve
the
maximum
throughput
in
the
current
TTI.
More
formally,
the
user
ik(t)
to
which
RBG
k
is
assigned
at
subframe
t
is
determined
as
Although
MT
can
maximize
cell
throughput,
it
cannot
provide
fairness
to
UEs
in
poor
channel
conditions.
Note
that
the
LTE
module
implements
two
MT
variants:
frequency
domain
(FDMT)
and
time
domain
(TDMT).
In
FDMT,
every
TTI,
MAC
scheduler
allocates
RBGs
to
the
UE
who
has
highest
achievable
rate
MOTO
Consortium
2013
15
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
calculated
by
sub-band
CQI.
In
TDMT,
every
TTI,
MAC
scheduler
selects
one
UE
which
has
highest
achievable
rate
calculated
by
wideband
CQI.
2.1.7.4 Throughput
to
Average
(TTA)
The
TTA
scheduler
can
be
considered
as
an
intermediate
between
MT
and
PF.
The
user
ik(t)
to
which
RBG
k
is
assigned
at
subframe
t
is
determined
as:
! R (k, t) $
&&
,
ik (t) = argmax ## j
j=1,,N " R j (t) %
where
Rj(t)
is
the
achievable
rate
for
user
j
at
subframe
t.
The
difference
between
Ri(k,t)
and
Ri(t)
achievable
rates
is
in
the
selection
of
the
MCS
value.
For
Ri(k,t),
MCS
is
calculated
by
subband
CQI
while
Ri(t)
is
calculated
by
wideband
CQI.
In
other
words,
the
average
achievable
throughput
in
the
current
TTI
is
used
as
normalization
factor
of
the
achievable
throughput
on
the
considered
RBG.
Thus,
TTA
scheduler
guarantees
that
the
best
RBs
are
allocated
to
each
user.
As
a
consequence
TTA
should
ensure
a
strong
level
of
fairness
on
a
temporal
window
of
a
single
TTI.
In
fact,
the
higher
the
overall
expected
throughput
of
a
user
is
the
lower
will
be
its
metric
on
a
single
resource
block.
2.1.7.5 Blind
Average
Throughput
(BAT)
The
BAT
scheduler
aims
to
provide
equal
throughput
to
all
UEs
under
eNB.
The
metric
used
in
TTA
is
calculated
as
follows:
! 1 $
&&
ik (t) = argmax ##
j=1,,N " T j (t) %
Two
BAT
variants
are
implemented
in
the
LTE
module.
In
the
time-domain
BAT
(TD-BET),
the
scheduler
selects
the
UE
with
largest
priority
metric
and
allocates
all
RBGs
to
this
UE.
On
the
other
hand,
in
the
frequency-domain
BAT
(FD-BET),
at
the
start
of
each
TTI,
the
scheduler
first
selects
one
UE
with
largest
priority
metric
(i.e.,
lowest
expected
throughput).
Then,
scheduler
assigns
one
RBG
to
this
UE,
it
calculates
expected
throughput
of
this
UE
and
uses
it
to
compare
with
past
average
throughput
Tj(t)
of
other
UEs.
The
scheduler
continues
to
allocate
RBG
to
this
UE
until
its
expected
throughput
is
not
the
smallest
one
among
past
average
throughput
Tj
(t)
of
all
UE.
Then,
the
scheduler
will
use
the
same
way
to
allocate
RBG
for
a
new
UE
that
has
the
lowest
past
average
throughput
Tj
(t)
until
all
RBGs
are
allocated
to
UEs.
The
principle
behind
this
is
that,
in
every
TTI,
the
scheduler
tries
the
best
to
achieve
the
equal
throughput
among
all
UEs.
2.1.7.6 Priority
Set
(PS)
The
PS
scheduler
controls
the
fairness
among
UEs
by
a
specified
Target
Bit
Rate
(TBR).
Then
it
uses
a
two-
step
technique
to
allocate
radio
resources.
At
first,
PS
scheduler
operates
in
the
time
domain
by
selecting
multiple
subsets
of
active
users
in
the
current
TTI
among
those
connected
to
the
eNB.
Then,
RBs
are
physically
allocated
to
each
user
based
on
frequency-selective
metrics.
The
main
advantage
of
such
partitioning
is
that
a
different
policy
can
be
selected
in
each
phase.
More
precisely,
the
PS
scheduler
implemented
in
the
LTE
simulation
model
divides
the
UEs
with
non-empty
RLC
buffer
into
two
sets
based
on
the
TBR.
Set
A
is
composed
of
all
UE
whose
past
average
throughput
is
smaller
than
TBR.
A
priority
metric
is
associated
to
each
UE
in
set
A
using
the
same
formulas
as
in
BET.
Set
B
is
composed
of
all
UE
whose
past
average
throughput
is
larger
(or
equal)
than
TBR.
A
priority
metric
is
associated
to
each
UE
in
set
A
using
the
same
formulas
as
in
BET.
A
priority
metric
is
associated
to
each
UE
in
set
B
using
the
same
formulas
as
in
PF.
UEs
belonged
to
set
A
have
higher
priority
than
ones
in
set
B.
Then
PS
scheduler
will
select
Nmux
UEs
with
highest
metric
in
two
sets
and
forward
those
UE
to
the
packet
scheduler.
Then,
the
scheduler
allocates
RBG
k
to
UE
i
in
a
way
similar
to
PF.
The
only
difference
is
that
the
past
throughput
performance
perceived
by
the
user
i
is
updated
only
when
the
i-th
user
is
actually
served.
MOTO
Consortium
2013
16
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
Value
Simulation
duration
Number
of
topologies
Number
of
UEs
Carrier
frequency
Bandwidth
for
the
Downlink
Symbols
for
TTI
SubFrame
length
SubCarriers
per
RB
SubCarrier
spacing
Fading
scenario
eNB
Power
transmission
MAC
scheduler
TBR
for
PS
scheduler
UE
Mobility
Traffic
model
10
seconds
20
[10,50]
+
tagged
UE
2
GHz
5
MHz
14
1
ms
12
15
kHz
pedestrian
43
dBm
RR,
PF,
MT,
TTA,
BAT,
PS
10
Kbps
Static
Best
effort:
infinite
buffer
Figure
3
and
Figure
4
represent,
for
each
of
the
considered
algorithms,
the
aggregate
cell
throughput
and
fairness
index.
Presented
results
demonstrate
how,
as
expected,
MT
performs
always
better
than
the
other
strategies
in
terms
of
the
overall
achieved
throughput,
but
significantly
worse
when
we
consider
the
achieved
fairness
level.
The
reason
is
that
MT
is
able
to
guarantee
a
high
throughput
only
to
a
limited
number
of
users,
whereas
the
rest
of
the
users
experience
very
low
throughputs.
In
addition,
the
fairness
decreases
as
the
number
of
users
increases.
In
fact,
growing
the
number
of
users,
the
probability
to
find
a
user
close
to
the
eNB
that
monopolizes
the
channel
increases.
On
the
other
hand,
BAT
is
able
to
obtain
the
highest
throughput
fairness
(see
Figure
4)
because
it
is
designed
to
equalize
the
throughput
of
individual
users.
However,
this
approach
is
highly
inefficient
from
the
point
of
view
of
the
aggregate
throughput
because
the
users
with
bad
channel
quality
(thus,
low
expected
throughputs)
drive
the
performance
of
users
with
good
channel
conditions.
Interestingly,
we
can
observe
that
the
cell
throughput
obtained
with
RR
is
similar
to
the
one
obtained
with
TTA,
and
the
differences
between
the
two
schedulers
decrease
with
the
number
of
users
in
the
cell.
The
schedulers
that
obtain
the
best
trade-off
between
fairness
and
cell
throughput
are
PF
and
PS
(which
is
in
part
derived
by
PF).
This
can
be
explained
by
the
fact
the
scheduling
decisions
take
into
account
the
expected
data
rate
that
a
user
would
obtain
if
a
given
RBG
were
assigned
to
him,
as
well
as
the
past
average
throughput.
Thus,
even
users
with
bad
channel
conditions
will
receive
their
share
of
radio
resources
on
the
long
term.
We
can
also
observe
that
the
impact
of
parameter
D
on
the
cell
MOTO
Consortium
2013
17
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
throughput
decreases
with
the
number
of
users.
This
is
quite
intuitive
because
average
measurements
tend
to
hide
sample
variations
if
the
sample
size
is
large.
Finally,
many
studies
have
shown
that
cell
capacity
slightly
increases
with
the
number
of
users
in
the
cell
due
to
the
effect
of
multi-user
diversity
gain
(i.e.,
the
probability
to
find
a
user
experiencing
good
channel
conditions
at
a
given
time
and
on
a
given
frequency
increases
with
the
number
of
users
in
the
cell).
However,
our
results
do
not
reveal
this
property
because
the
open-area
pedestrian
scenario
is
typically
affected
only
by
flat
fading,
which
minimize
the
multi-user
diversity.
18000
18000
16000
RR
PF
MT
TTA
BAT
PS
14000
12000
16000
10000
8000
6000
4000
12000
10000
2000
0
RR
PF
MT
TTA
BAT
PS
14000
8000
6000
4000
2000
10
100
D [m]
0
1000
10
100
D [m]
(a) N=10
1000
(b) N=20
18000
16000
RR
PF
MT
TTA
BAT
PS
14000
12000
10000
8000
6000
4000
2000
0
10
100
D [m]
1000
(a)
N=50
Figure
3:
Total
throughput
of
a
single
LTE
cell
as
a
function
of
the
distance
of
the
tagged
UE
from
the
eNB.
A
variable
number
N
of
UEs
is
uniformly
distributed
in
the
cell.
Downlink
traffic
flows
are
saturated.
18
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
1
RR
PF
MT
TTA
BAT
PS
0.6
0.4
0.2
RR
PF
MT
TTA
BAT
PS
0.8
Fairness Index
Fairness Index
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
10
100
D [m]
1000
10
100
D [m]
(a) N=10
1000
(b)
N=20
1
RR
PF
MT
TTA
BAT
PS
Fairness Index
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
10
100
D [m]
1000
(a)
N=50
Figure
4:
Throughput
fairness
of
a
single
LTE
cell
as
a
function
of
the
distance
of
the
tagged
UE
from
the
eNB.
A
variable
number
N
of
UEs
is
uniformly
distributed
in
the
cell.
Downlink
traffic
flows
are
saturated.
Up
to
now
we
have
analysed
the
cell
throughput
by
highlighting
the
intrinsic
trade-off
between
fairness
and
aggregate
throughput.
The
general
conclusion
is
that
in
most
cases
higher
the
fairness,
the
lower
the
aggregate
throughput
that
is
obtained
in
a
cell.
However,
cell
throughput
measurements
do
not
provide
a
particularly
useful
insight
on
the
performance
perceived
by
an
individual
user.
An
obvious
result
is
that
the
average
user
throughput
decreases
as
the
number
of
users
increases
because
the
same
amount
of
resources
has
to
be
shared
among
a
higher
number
of
competing
UEs.
However,
this
is
generally
not
true
when
considering
a
tagged
user.
Therefore
in
Figure
5
we
plot
the
throughput
perceived
by
a
tagged
user
in
the
same
scenarios
that
were
used
to
obtain
the
results
reported
in
Figure
3
and
Figure
4.
Our
results
indicate
that
when
the
tagged
user
is
close
to
the
eNB,
it
generally
obtains
a
stable
throughput.
On
the
other
hand,
after
a
critical
distance
(around
200
meters
in
the
considered
fading
environment)
throughput
performance
typically
falls
steeply.
In
fact,
LTE
standard
changes
the
Modulation
and
Coding
Scheme
(MCS)
assigned
to
a
UE
as
a
function
of
the
reported
CQI,
and
the
higher
the
distance
between
the
tagged
user
and
the
eNB,
the
lower
the
CQI
should
be.
However,
the
exact
throughput
behaviour
of
a
tagged
user
depends
in
a
complex
manner
on
a
variety
of
factors
beyond
channel
conditions,
including
the
history
of
the
past
average
throughput.
For
instance,
with
TTA
scheduler
there
is
an
intermediate
range
of
distances
where
the
throughput
perceived
by
the
tagged
user
may
be
even
higher
than
the
one
obtained
when
the
tagged
user
is
close
to
the
eNB.
Another
observation
is
that
with
MT
scheduler
throughput
performances
are
greatly
influenced
by
the
topology
layout
and
this
explains
the
huge
confidence
intervals
obtained
when
the
MT
scheduler
is
used.
MOTO
Consortium
2013
19
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
1200
RR
PF
MT
TTA
BAT
PS
2000
2500
1500
1000
500
0
10
100
D [m]
1000
800
600
400
200
0
1000
RR
PF
TTA
BAT
PS
10
100
D [m]
(a) N=10
(b)
N=20
500
1000
RR
PF
TTA
BAT
PS
400
300
200
100
0
10
100
D [m]
1000
(a)
N=50
Figure
5:
Throughput
perceived
by
the
tagged
UE
as
a
function
of
the
distance
of
the
tagged
UE
from
the
eNB.
A
variable
number
N
of
UEs
is
uniformly
distributed
in
the
cell.
Downlink
traffic
flows
are
saturated.
2.2.2 Results
in
vehicular
environments
The
goal
of
this
second
set
of
tests
is
to
evaluate
the
LTE
throughput
performance
in
a
typical
vehicular
environment.
To
this
end,
we
have
considered
a
straight
road
segment
(e.g.,
a
section
of
an
highway)
with
four
eNBs
deployed
along
the
road.
The
cell
radius
is
set
to
1.5
Km.
Thus,
each
eNB
covers
with
its
signal
a
section
of
the
road
segment
that
is
3
Km
long.
The
mobile
UEs
(e.g.,
mobile
phones
or
onboard
wireless
transceivers)
are
initially
deployed
according
to
a
uniform
distribution
over
the
road.
Then,
the
speed
of
each
vehicle
is
selected
uniformly
in
the
range
[80,120]
kmph.
Thus,
the
number
of
UEs
that
are
attached
to
the
same
eNB
varies
during
the
simulation
because
vehicles
can
overtake
other
front
vehicles
that
move
slower.
The
physical
layer
parameters
are
the
same
as
the
one
reported
in
Table
II.
Regarding
the
packet
scheduler,
we
have
considered
only
the
PF
scheduler
because
this
scheduling
algorithm
provides
the
best
trade-off
between
fairness
and
cell
throughput.
In
Figure
6,
we
plot
the
throughput
obtained
by
a
single
UE
moving
at
constant
speed
as
a
function
of
the
travelled
distance
for
different
velocities.
As
expected,
the
throughput
shows
a
bell-shaped
trend
because
the
LTE
capacity
is
order
of
magnitudes
lower
at
the
cell
edge
than
close
to
the
cell
centre.
Interestingly,
the
dependence
of
the
throughput
on
the
UEs
speed
is
negligible,
at
least
for
the
considered
ranges
of
speed.
This
can
be
explained
by
noting
the
robustness
of
the
LTE
technology
against
the
Doppler
effect.
20
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
20
speed=80kmph
speed=120kmph
Throughput (Mbps)
15
10
0
0
6
X (Km)
10
12
Figure 6: LTE link capacity measured by a single mobile UE for different speeds
In
Figure
7
Figure
8
we
plot
the
spatial
distribution
of
the
throughput
obtained
by
a
varying
number
of
mobile
UEs
attached
to
the
same
roadside
eNB.
Specifically,
we
vary
the
density
of
mobile
UEs
in
the
road
segment
from
2
UE/km
up
to
10
UE/km.
As
pointed
out
above
each
UE
uniformly
selects
a
speed
uniformly
in
the
range
[80,120]
kmph.
Then,
in
the
figures
we
show
the
average,
the
maximum
and
the
minimum
throughputs
measured
by
a
generic
UE
as
a
function
of
the
travelled
distance
under
the
cell
coverage
area
of
the
eNB.
As
expected,
the
higher
the
UE
density
and
the
lower
the
throughput.
Furthermore,
with
a
low
UE
density
we
can
observe
that
there
is
a
higher
relative
difference
between
the
minimum
and
maximum
throughout
performance
that
each
UE
obtains.
8000
average
minimum
maximum
7000
Throughput (Kbps)
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
0
0
500
1000
1500
X (meters)
2000
2500
3000
Figure 7: Spatial distribution of per-UE throughput for a node density of 2 UEs per km
21
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
1200
average
minimum
maximum
Throughput (Kbps)
1000
800
600
400
200
0
0
500
1000
1500
X (meters)
2000
2500
3000
Figure 8: Spatial distribution of per-UE throughput for a node density of 10 UEs per km
To
investigate
more
in
depth
how
throughput
dynamics
are
affected
by
node
density,
in
Figure
9
we
show
two
scatter
plots
that
illustrate
the
correlation
that
exists
between
the
average
throughput
obtained
by
each
UE
and
the
coefficient
of
variation
(CV)1
of
the
throughout
samples
for
the
two
node
densities
of
Figure
7
and
Figure
8.
We
remind
that
the
coefficient
of
variation
is
defined
as
the
ratio
of
the
standard
deviation
to
the
mean
and
it
is
a
normalized
measure
of
the
dispersion
of
a
probability
distribution
or
a
discrete
data
set.
Distributions
with
CV>1
are
considered
high
variance.
The
plots
indicate
that
all
UEs
experience
a
CV
of
throughput
measurements
between
1
and
1.2.
In
other
words,
the
performance
of
an
average
user
cannot
be
considered
representative
of
the
performance
of
each
individual
user.
1.2
1.2
0.8
0.8
CV
1.4
CV
1.4
0.6
0.6
0.4
0.4
0.2
0.2
0
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
2000
Average Throughput (Kbps)
2200
2400
(2 UE/km)
0
180
200
220
240
260
280
Average Throughput (Kbps)
300
320
340
(10 UE/Km)
Figure
9:
Scatter
plot
of
average
values
and
coefficients
of
variation
of
the
throughputs
obtained
by
each
mobile
UE
for
two
node
densities.
22
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
and
the
time
left
is
equal
to
the
time
required
to
send
the
message
through
the
infrastructure,
denoted
as
P,
the
offloading
coordination
agent
enters
a
panic
zone
and
pushes
the
content
to
all
uninfected
nodes
through
the
infrastructure,
guaranteeing
100%
delivery
ratio
while
minimizing
the
load
on
the
infrastructure.
The
high-level
operation
of
Push&Track
is
illustrated
in
Figure
10.
Note
that
every
re-injection
decision
is
expected
to
bring
benefit
to
the
system,
but
it
depends
on
the
re-
injection
time
and
the
target
node
(to
which
copies
will
be
sent
through
the
infrastructure).
In
fact,
there
is
a
difficult
trade-off
to
consider.
On
the
one
hand,
if
too
many
copies
are
injected
in
the
beginning
(in
general,
earlier
injections
have
more
time
to
diffuse)
the
system
may
be
overestimated
(as
we
do
not
know
in
advance
how
nodes
will
encounter).
On
the
other
hand,
if
the
system
injects
too
few
copies
in
the
beginning
and
waits
for
the
panic
zone
to
compensate
for
lags,
many
opportunistic
encounters
might
be
wasted
because
of
the
lack
of
enough
copies
in
the
network.
Re-injection
is
beneficial
when
the
subsequent
opportunistic
transmissions
saves
additional
infrastructure
pushes.
Of
course,
the
benefit
can
be
null
if
the
offloading
coordination
agent
selects
a
node
that
would
have
received
the
message
later
from
another
node.
Random:
Push
to
a
random
node
chosen
uniformly
among
those
that
have
not
yet
acknowledged
reception.
Entry
time:
If
content
subscription
is
localized,
then
each
nodes
entry
time
(i.e.,
subscription
time)
is
correlated
to
its
position
in
the
interest
area.
For
example,
selecting
nodes
that
have
the
most
recent
(Entry-Newest)
or
oldest
(Entry-Oldest)
entry
times
should
target
nodes
near
to
the
edge
of
the
area,
whereas
pushing
to
those
that
are
closest
to
the
average
entry
time
(Entry-Average)
should
target
the
middle
of
the
area.
GPS-based:
On
top
of
the
existing
acknowledge
messages,
each
node
may
also
periodically
inform
the
control
system
of
its
current
location.
From
this
information
we
consider
two
GPS-based
strategies.
In
order
to
ensure
rapid
replication,
GPS-Density
strategy
pushes
the
content
to
an
uninfected
node
within
the
highest
density
area,
GPS-Potential
pushes
the
content
to
the
node
that
is
the
furthest
away
from
other
infected
nodes.
A
simple
re-injection
strategy
is
to
bind
the
actual
current
infection
ratio
to
a
fixed
objective
function.
Let
x
be
the
fraction
of
time
elapsed
between
a
messages
creation
and
expiration
dates.
Each
strategy
is
defined
by
an
objective
function
(see
Figure
11),
which
indicates
for
every
0
x
1
what
the
current
infection
ratio
should
be
(i.e.,
the
fraction
of
the
number
of
subscribing
nodes
that
have
the
content).
24
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
Slow
start:
This
includes
two
very
simple
strategies
that
push
an
initial
number
of
copies
and
then
do
nothing
until
the
panic
zone:
the
Single
Copy
and
Ten
Copies
strategies.
The
objective
function
for
the
Quadratic
strategy
is
x2.
The
Slow
Linear
strategy
starts
with
an
x/2
linear
objective
for
the
first
half
of
the
messages
lifetime,
and
finishes
with
a
3/2
x
1/2
objective.
Fast
start:
The
objective
function
for
the
Square
Root
strategy
is x .
The
Fast
Linear
strategy
starts
with
a
3/2x
linear
objective
for
the
first
half
of
the
messages
lifetime,
and
finishes
with
an
x/2
+
1/2
objective.
Steady: This is the Linear strategy which ensures an infection ratio strictly proportional to x.
3.3.2
The
general
principle
behind
Push&Track
is
to
adapt
to
the
heterogeneous
individual
mobility
pattern
of
nodes.
This
heterogeneity
is
most
of
the
time
at
the
base
of
a
stepwise
pattern
in
the
epidemic
diffusion,
alternating
plateaux
and
periods
of
infection
as
in
Figure
12.
For
this
reason,
a
better
re-injection
decision
is
taken
by
analyzing
the
outlook
of
the
diffusion
rather
than
comparing
the
actual
infection
to
a
fixed
objective
function.
Exploiting
this
evidence,
Push&Track
detects
plateaux
in
the
content
diffusion
evolution,
and,
if
needed,
adaptively
re-injects
additional
copies
in
the
system
to
fine
control
the
pace
at
which
contents
are
disseminated.
Thanks
to
this
adaptive
re-injection
strategy,
Push&Track
reaches
much
better
performance
than
using
fixed
objective
functions.
Figure
12:
Epidemic
diffusion
of
6
initial
copies
in
the
Rollernet
dataset:
the
diffusion
behavior
presents
three
steep
zones
and
three
flat
zones,
resulting
from
the
heterogeneity
of
encounter
probabilities.
MOTO
Consortium
2013
25
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
3.3.2.1 Motivation
Let
us
now
dig
into
the
relationship
between
mobility
patterns
and
the
stepwise
pattern
in
the
epidemic
diffusion.
This
phenomenon
is
intrinsically
related
to
the
heterogeneity
of
contact
patterns,
i.e.,
the
fact
that
two
different
nodes
do
not
meet
on
average
the
same
number
of
other
nodes.
To
capture
the
heterogeneity
of
patterns,
we
adopt
a
Marked
Poisson
Process
model
of
node
contacts
[19][33].
In
this
model,
the
meeting
times
of
any
two
nodes
(i,j)
follow
a
Poisson
Process
with
rate
ij
=
pij
.
The
inter-contact
times
Tij
are
thus
independent
exponentials
with
parameter
ij,
and
contact
matrix
C
=
(pij)
captures
the
patterns
of
interactions
between
nodes.
In
the
homogeneous
case,
C
is
the
identity
matrix,
i.e.,
all
nodes
can
see
each
other
with
the
same
probability.
At
any
given
time
instant
of
the
dissemination
process,
a
set
S
of
nodes
is
infected.
We
are
interested
in
the
random
plateau
duration
TS
during
which
the
dissemination
does
not
progress.
This
corresponds
to
the
random
time
during
which
this
set
of
nodes
do
not
meet
any
other
nodes.
Looking
at
the
set
of
links
between
nodes
in
S
and
its
complement,
one
can
see
that
TS
=
infiS,jS
Tij
.
By
Poisson
calculus,
and
noting
the
cut
value
S
=iS,jS
pij,
TS
is
an
exponential
random
variable
with
parameter
S
[16].
The
expected
plateauing
duration,
once
set
S
has
been
reached,
is
thus
1/S.
This
simple
argument
shows
that
TS
is
directly
related
to
the
structural
properties
of
the
contact
patterns
C.
This
provides
a
natural
connection
between
the
community
structure
of
the
contact
graph
and
the
progression
(and
lack
of
progression)
of
the
opportunistic
dissemination
process.
Applying
these
ideas
to
the
graph
of
contacts
C
(which
represents
the
probability
of
two
nodes
to
meet)
means
that
a
community
S
of
users
will
spread
the
message
quickly
within
the
group
(high
conductance),
but
will
reach
a
plateau
once
the
nodes
in
the
group
all
have
the
message,
because
the
weight
of
inter-cluster
edges
and
thus
its
cut
value
S
is
low.
This
observation
provides
the
motivation
of
our
further
investigation
of
adaptive
offloading
strategies
that
are
able
to
chase
the
individual
mobility
of
nodes,
re-injecting
copies
when
the
diffusion
evolution
runs
into
a
plateau.
Figure
13:
Discrete
time
slope
detection
performed
by
DROiD.
For
clarity
we
consider
the
content
creation
time
t0=0.
3.3.2.2 Re-injection
strategy
We
achieve
higher
offloading
efficiency
by
making
the
re-injection
decision
dependent
not
only
on
the
actual
dissemination
level,
but
also
on
the
trend
of
the
infection
ratio.
For
instance,
using
only
fixed
objective
functions,
the
offloading
coordinator
reacts
too
late
when
the
infection
ratio
is
above
the
objective
function
but
still
not
evolving,
or
overreacts
when
the
infection
MOTO
Consortium
2013
26
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
evolves
well
but
its
instantaneous
value
still
lies
under
the
objective
function.
Late
or
too
violent
re-
injections
result
in
a
waste
of
messages
pushed
through
the
infrastructure.
Another
limitation
in
the
use
of
a
fixed
objective
function
is
that
different
objective
functions
behave
differently
depending
on
the
content
lifetime
and
network
status.
With
the
derivative
re-injection
strategy,
the
offloading
coordinator
stores
in
memory
a
short
snippet
of
past
infection
ratio
values.
All
content
has
an
associated
tracker
that
stores
the
evolution
of
the
infection
ratio
for
a
temporal
sliding
window
of
size
W.
As
illustrated
in
Figure
13
at
evaluation
time
step
t,
the
offloading
coordinator
performs
a
forward
difference
quotient
on
the
instantaneous
infection
ratio
I(t)
that
approximates
to
a
discrete
derivative:
I (t ) =
I (t ) I (t W )
W
I()
approximates
the
slope
of
the
infection
ratio
and
is
one
of
the
parameters
that
influence
the
re-
injection
decision.
Push&Track
in
this
case
re-injects
additional
copies
of
the
content
whenever
the
discrete
derivative
I()
is
below
a
lim
threshold
computed
on
line.
The
threshold
lim
varies
according
to
the
actual
distance
from
the
panic
zone
and
the
infection
rate.
lim
is
computed
as
the
ratio
between
the
fraction
of
uninfected
nodes
and
the
time
remaining
before
the
panic
zone.
A
steeper
slope
is
needed
when
time
gets
closer
to
panic
zone
or
the
infection
ratio
is
lagging
(different
from
when
we
are
at
the
beginning
of
the
infection
process).
Formally
speaking,
we
have:
lim (t ) =
1 I (t )
( D P) t
As
a
final
step,
the
injection
rate
rinj(t)
is
computed
as
a
piecewise
function,
depending
on
the
ratio
of
the
current
I(t)
value
and
the
lim
threshold:
c
I (t ) 0
(t )
rinj (t ) = c 1 I
0 < I (t ) lim (t )
(
t
)
lim
0
I (t ) > lim (t )
where
c[0,
1]
is
a
clipping
value
used
to
limit
the
overall
amount
of
re-injected
copies
in
the
case
of
negative
values
of
I
.
Finally,
rinj(t)
is
multiplied
with
the
number
of
uninfected
nodes
to
find
R(t),
the
number
of
copies
to
re-
inject
at
t:
R(t ) = (1 I (t )) N (t ) rinj (t )
where
|N
(t)|
is
the
total
number
of
nodes
in
the
network.
3.4 Results
3.4.1
Evaluation Setup
We
evaluate
Push&Track
re-injection
strategies
using
a
large-scale
vehicular
mobility
trace
of
Bologna
(Italy)
with
10,333
vehicles.
This
dataset,
initially
exploited
to
evaluate
cooperative
road
traffic
management
strategies
within
the
previous
FP7
iTetris
project,
covers
20.6
km2
comprising
191
km
of
roads.
The
dataset
is
derived
by
real
traffic
measurements
and
inferred
into
a
micro-mobility
model
through
the
SUMO
simulator.
From
the
extracted
mobility
data,
we
derive
a
contact
trace
considering
a
100
meters
threshold.
The
final
trace
has
duration
of
about
one
hour;
in
average,
3,500
vehicles
are
present
at
the
same
time
(because
of
their
mobility,
some
nodes
leave
while
others
join
during
the
observation
period).
MOTO
Consortium
2013
27
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
We
built
a
streamlined
event
based
simulator,
considering
a
simple
contact-based
ad
hoc
MAC
model,
where
a
node
may
transmit
only
to
a
single
neighbor
at
a
time.
Transmission
times
are
deterministic
since
we
do
not
take
into
account
complex
phenomena
that
occur
in
the
wireless
channel
such
as
fading
and
shadowing.
The
ad
hoc
routing
protocol
employed
by
nodes
to
disseminate
the
content
is
the
epidemic
forwarding.
We
investigate
how
our
system
performs
under
tight
delivery
constraints,
when
the
maximum
delivery
delay
D
lies
in
the
range
[30,
180]
seconds.
In
fact,
we
are
mostly
interested
in
very
short
maximum
reception
delays,
in
the
order
of
minutes,
as
otherwise
users
would
not
realistically
accept
to
trade-off
reception
delays
for
cellular
capacity.
All
the
results
presented
in
this
section
are
averages
over
10
simulation
runs.
Contents
are
issued
periodically;
with
the
previous
one
expiring
when
a
new
one
is
created
(for
now
a
single
content
is
active
in
the
system
at
a
time).
3.4.2
We
focus
primarily
on
the
aggregate
load
that
flows
through
the
infrastructure
and
across
the
ad
hoc
links.
Load
measurements
take
into
account
acknowledgement
messages
as
well
as
failed
and
aborted
transfers.
We
use
two
reference
strategies
for
evaluation
purposes:
infrastructure
only
(Infra)
and
connected
component
oracle
(Oracle).
In
the
Infra
strategy,
there
is
no
offloading
at
all,
and
the
infrastructure
represents
the
only
means
of
distributing
content.
In
the
Oracle
strategy,
the
offloading
coordinator
has
a
real-time
picture
of
the
ad
hoc
connectivity
of
the
entire
network.
In
this
strategy,
the
oracle
pushes
the
content
to
a
random
node
within
each
existing
connected
component.
We
are
mainly
interested
in
the
offloading
efficiency,
which
is
computed
by
comparing
the
infrastructure
load
of
a
specific
run
with
the
reference
Infra
strategy
load,
e.g.
in
the
absence
of
any
ad
hoc
radio.
One
of
the
most
interesting
result
is
that
the
Random
re-injection
strategy
consistently
does
better
than
most
of
the
more
sophisticated
strategies
described
in
Section
3.2,
as
shown
in
Figure
14.
Random
selection
combines
the
best
of
all
the
more
complex
strategies.
Indeed
it
statistically
has
a
high
chance
of
hitting
the
large
connected
components
and
also
tends
to
spread
the
copies
uniformly
over
the
considered
area.
If
one
is
not
willing
to
deal
with
the
added
complexity
of
a
more
sophisticated
control
channel,
let
alone
privacy
concerns
about
localization
and/or
proximity
information,
then
the
simple
Random
whom-strategy
consistently
performs
very
well.
As
we
can
see
from
Figure
14,
in
the
absence
of
feedback
loop,
the
choice
of
the
initial
number
of
copies
to
inject
has
a
huge
impact
on
the
offload
ratio.
Consider
the
Single-Copy
and
the
Ten-Copy
strategies.
Due
to
the
epidemic
propagation,
a
difference
of
only
9
initial
copies
translates
to
a
4x
final
offloading
efficiency.
Figure
14:
1-minute
delay:
average
offloading
efficiency
for
different
combinations
of
whom
and
when
strategies,
three
different
participation
rates
are
considered.
The
rows
correspond,
from
top
to
bottom,
to
the
following
whom
strategies:
Random,
Connected
Components,
Entry-Oldest,
Entry-Average,
Entry-Newest,
GPS-Density,
and
GPS-
Potential.
The
columns
represent
the
following
when
strategies,
from
left
to
right:
Single
Copy,
Ten
Copies,
Quadratic,
Slow
Linear,
Linear,
Fast
Linear,
and
Square
Root.
On
the
other
hand,
the
presence
of
the
control
loop
permits
to
quickly
react
and
adapt
to
changing
conditions.
This
allows
Push&Track
to
avoid
massive
last-minute
re-injections
upon
arriving
in
the
panic
MOTO
Consortium
2013
28
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
zone,
and
achieving
excellent
offloading
efficiency
(73%
for
Slow
Start
and
72%
for
Linear
at
100%
participation
rate).
A
drawback
of
this
schema
is
that
it
does
not
propose
a
single
solution,
but
instead
a
multitude
of
objective
functions;
the
problem
is
that
different
objective
functions
behave
differently
depending
on
the
content
lifetime,
network
status
and
number
of
users.
For
instance,
we
can
clearly
see
that
in
Figure
14
the
objective
function
that
gives
the
best
results
is
not
the
same
for
25%
and
100%
participation
rates.
3.4.3
Figure
15:
Offloading
efficiency
for
different
re-injection
schema.
Different
maximum
reception
delays
for
messages
are
considered.
For
evaluation,
we
compare
the
derivative
strategy
with
the
Linear
and
Slow-start
strategies,
since
these
strategies
gives
the
best
results
in
the
100%
participation
scenario.
All
the
Push&Track
(PnT
in
figures)
strategies
perform
very
well
in
terms
of
reduced
infrastructure
load,
by
delivering
the
majority
of
traffic
through
device-to-device
communications
even
in
the
case
of
tight
delays.
As
we
can
see
from
Figure
15,
compared
to
Linear
and
Slow-start
strategies,
the
derivative
strategy
always
leads
to
better
results.
The
gap
between
the
derivative
and
the
two
fixed
objective
functions
strategies
increases
when
the
tolerance
to
delay
increases,
suggesting
a
better
adaptation
to
the
diffusion
evolution.
This
curve
shows
also
a
well-known
phenomenon:
an
increase
in
the
reception
delay
corresponds
to
an
increase
in
the
offloading
efficiency.
29
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
Figure
16:
Infrastructure
vs.
ad
hoc
load
per
message
sent
using
the
Infra,
the
Oracle,
and
the
DROiD
strategies.
Different
maximum
reception
delays
for
messages
are
considered.
Simulation
results
plotted
in
Figure
16,
show
that
DROiD
presents
roughly
the
same
infrastructure
load
of
the
oracle
to
guarantee
100%-delivery
ratio.
Sudden
variations
in
the
infection
ratio,
due
to
nodes
that
dynamically
enter
and
leave,
are
well
handled
by
the
feedback
mechanism.
Although
DROiD
and
Oracle
show
more
or
less
the
same
trend
in
the
offloading
efficiency
curve,
this
result
is
achieved
through
two
completely
different
strategies.
On
the
one
hand,
Oracle,
exploits
its
perfect
knowledge
of
the
connectivity
status
in
the
network,
pushing
the
content
to
specific
high
potential
nodes.
On
the
other
hand,
the
derivative
strategy
has
a
much
less
complete,
and
slightly
out
of
sync
view
of
the
system,
and
employs
the
algorithm
explained
in
Section
3.3.2.2
to
guess
when
additional
copies
of
the
content
are
required.
30
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
! b $
P ( X > x) = #
& , b, x, > 0 ,
where
b
is
the
scale
and
the
shape
parameter.
The
problem
with
"b+ x%
Pareto
distributions
is
that
their
expectation
is
finite
only
for
certain
values
of
their
exponent
.
More
specifically,
the
expectation
is
finite
if
>1,
while
for
<1
it
diverges
to
infinity.
Being
the
delay
the
result
of
the
composition
of
the
time
intervals
between
node
encounters,
depending
on
the
exponent
values
featured
by
intermeeting
times,
the
expectation
of
the
delay
might
diverge.
In
practical
terms,
in
cases
where
this
happens,
messages
may
be
trapped
on
nodes
from
where
they
are
not
forwarded
further
(according
to
the
rules
of
the
specific
forwarding
protocol),
thus
not
reaching
the
final
destination.
Therefore,
given
a
specific
pattern
of
nodes
mobility
(and,
thus,
a
specific
pattern
of
intermeeting
times)
and
a
given
forwarding
protocol,
it
is
important
to
know
whether
that
forwarding
protocol
may
yield
infinite
delay,
in
order
to
know
whether
it
can
safely
be
used
in
the
network
or
not.
In
the
following
of
this
section,
we
therefore
first
present
the
main
results
obtained
by
MOTO
partners
on
the
problem
of
convergence,
and
then
we
present
an
initial
model
for
the
delay
of
forwarding
protocols
in
case
of
convergence.
The
first
aspect
is
background
information,
as
it
has
been
obtained
by
MOTO
partners
before
the
start
of
the
project.
It
is
nevertheless
briefly
presented
hereafter
as
it
is
one
of
the
starting
points
of
the
activities
in
the
work
package.
Specifically,
we
are
currently
extending
these
results
to
more
general
settings,
and
we
expect
to
report
these
new
results
in
the
following
deliverables
of
the
work
package.
As
the
routing
and
forwarding
processes
are
typically
done
at
the
same
time
in
opportunistic
networks,
the
two
terms,
although
conceptually
different,
are
typically
used
interchangeably
in
the
literature,
and
in
the
following
of
this
document.
MOTO
Consortium
2013
31
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
! t (ij ) $ ij
Fij (t ) = # (ij )min &
" tmin + x %
(1)
(ij )
where
ij
is
the
shape
parameter
and
tmin
the
scale
parameter.
Note
that
considering
such
heterogeneous
environment
(instead
of
a
homogeneous
one
where
all
nodes
meet
with
exactly
the
same
distribution)
is
one
of
the
main
contributions
of
[14]
with
respect
to
previous
literature.
From
the
standard
properties
of
Pareto
distributions
it
follows
that
the
average
intermeeting
time
between
i
and
j
is
finite
if
and
only
if
(iff)
ij
is
larger
than
1.
Another
important
statistic
for
this
study
is
the
residual
of
intermeeting
times,
i.e.
the
time
until
the
next
contact
between
the
two
nodes,
starting
from
a
random
point
in
time.
It
is
known
that,
if
intermeeting
times
follow
a
Pareto
distribution,
residuals
are
also
Pareto
with
the
same
scale
parameter
and
shape
parameter
reduced
by
one
(i.e.,
ij
-1
for
nodes
i
and
j).
It
thus
follows
that
residuals
have
finite
expectation
iff
ij
is
greater
than
2.
In
terms
of
forwarding
strategies,
results
presented
in
[14]
hold
for
social-oblivious
protocols,
one
of
the
two
large
families
that
can
be
identified
in
the
literature.
Social-oblivious
protocols,
which
do
not
exploit
any
information
about
the
users'
context
and
social
behaviour
but
just
hand
over
the
message
to
the
first
node
encountered
(avoiding
at
most
those
nodes
that
have
already
forwarded
the
message).
The
main
advantage
of
these
strategies
is
that
they
are
intrinsically
simple
and
lightweight
(practically
no
information
to
collect,
store,
or
mine).
Despite
their
simplicity,
they
are
a
reference
point
in
the
literature,
as
a
number
of
foundational
works
on
the
properties
of
opportunistic
networks
have
been
found
considering
this
class
of
protocols.
To
accurately
represent
the
different
variants
in
this
class,
we
identify
three
main
groups,
differing
in
the
number
of
hops
allowed
between
source
and
destination,
the
number
of
copies
generated,
and
whether
the
source
and
relay
nodes
keep
track
of
the
evolution
of
the
forwarding
process
or
not.
First,
forwarding
strategies
can
be
single-copy
or
multi-copy.
In
the
former
case,
at
any
point
in
time
there
can
be
at
most
one
copy
of
each
message
circulating
in
the
network.
In
the
latter,
multiple
copies
can
travel
in
parallel,
thus
in
principle
multiplying
the
opportunities
to
reach
the
destination
(we
assume
that
all
copies
are
generated
by
the
source
node).
Second,
forwarding
protocols
can
be
classified
based
on
the
number
of
hops
that
they
allow
messages
to
traverse,
or,
in
other
words,
based
on
a
TTL
computed
on
the
number
of
hops.
When
the
number
of
allowed
hops
is
finite,
the
last
relay
can
only
deliver
the
message
to
the
destination
directly.
Third,
the
amount
of
knowledge
that
each
agent
in
the
forwarding
process
can
rely
on
(or
is
willing
to
collect
and
store)
is
an
additional
element
for
classifying
forwarding
strategies.
Focusing
on
the
source
node,
there
can
be
social-oblivious
strategies
in
which
the
source
node
does
not
keep
track
at
all
of
how
the
forwarding
process
progresses.
In
this
case,
considering
the
configuration
in
which
the
source
node
can
generate
up
to
m
copies
of
the
message,
the
m
copies
might
end
up
being
all
distributed
to
the
exact
same
relay,
thus
eliminating
the
potential
benefits
of
multi-copy
forwarding.
A
memoryful
source,
instead,
is
able
to
guarantee
to
use
distinct
relays.
A
similar
problem
holds
for
intermediate
relays.
Memoryless
relays
can
forward
the
message
to
the
same
next
hop
more
than
once,
because
they
are
not
at
all
aware
of
what
happened
in
the
past.
On
the
other
hand,
memoryful
relays
possess
this
knowledge,
and
are
able
to
refuse
the
custody
of
messages
that
they
have
already
relayed.
Please
note
that
we
assume
that
the
source
node
can
never
be
handed
over
messages
that
it
has
generated.
This
assumption
simply
takes
into
account
the
fact
that
the
source
identity
is
always
enclosed
into
the
message
header,
thus
this
does
MOTO
Consortium
2013
32
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
not
require
any
additional
knowledge
beside
what
is
already
present
in
the
system.
Table
3
summarizes
the
feasible
combinations
(the
ones
marked
with
the
checkmarks)
of
the
forwarding
characteristics
described
above
when
social-oblivious
schemes
are
considered.
These
combinations
can
be
found
in
well
known
routing
strategies.
For
example,
the
1-hop
1-copy
memoryless
forwarding
corresponds
to
the
Direct
Transmission
strategy
[7],
in
which
the
source
node
can
only
deliver
the
messages
to
the
destination.
The
2-
hop
1-copy
memoryless
forwarding
is
equivalent
to
the
Two
Hop
forwarding
introduced
in
[25].
The
2-hop
m-copy
memoryful
forwarding
is
equivalent
to
the
multi-copy
version
of
the
Two
Hop
protocol
studied
in
[20].
Please
note
that
relays
can
be
memoryful
only
when
they
have
multiple
forwarding
choices.
This
is
not
the
case
when
the
number
of
hops
is
limited
to
either
one
(there
is
no
relay
in
this
case)
or
two
(relays
can
only
deliver
the
message
to
the
destination).
Table
3.
Summary
of
forwarding
strategies.
In
[14]
we
derive
sufficient
and
necessary
conditions
on
the
shapes
of
the
intermeeting
time
distributions
for
convergence
of
the
various
families
of
protocols
highlighted
in
Table
3.
We
hereafter
exemplify
one
of
these
cases,
and
then
provide
the
final
results
for
all
classes,
together
with
examples
of
practical
applications
of
these
results.
Let
us
consider
the
2-hop
1-copy
memoryless
scheme.
We
can
prove
that
the
protocol
converges
iff
both
the
following
conditions
hold
where
s
and
d
denote
the
source
and
destination
nodes,
respectively.
The
physical
meaning
of
the
conditions
is
quite
intuitive.
Recall
that
in
the
2-hop
1-copy
scheme
the
source
hands
over
the
only
copy
of
the
message
to
the
first
encountered
node,
which
then
has
to
relay
it
directly
to
the
destination.
Condition
C1
guarantees
that
the
first
phase
occurs
within
a
finite
expected
time.
Specifically,
the
source
node
encounters
the
first
possible
relay
with
a
time
that
is
distributed
according
to
a
Pareto
law
with
shape
sj
Ps . Therefore, the first phase converges if the average value of this time is finite, which leads to
jPs
condition
C1.
Condition
C2
guarantees
that
whatever
relay
is
chosen
by
s,
it
encounters
the
destination
within
a
finite
expected
time
(note
that
the
time
for
such
relay
to
meet
the
destination
is
the
residual
of
their
intermeeting
time,
as
the
process
of
encounter
between
nodes
is
asynchronous,
and
therefore
node
s
meets
the
relay
at
a
random
point
in
time
with
respect
to
the
meetings
between
the
relay
and
the
destination).
Replicating
the
same
methodology
also
for
the
other
schemes,
we
obtain
the
conditions
listed
in
Table
4.
Table
4.
Convergence
conditions.
33
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
where
m
denotes
the
number
of
copies
generated
by
the
source,
and
m*
is
defined
as
follows
and
denotes
the
i-th
largest
sj
with
j Ps .
C3
and
C4
are
needed
only
in
case
of
multi-copy
*
i
forwarding.
The
value
m*
is
a
threshold
on
the
number
of
copies,
such
that
if
the
source
generates
up
to
m*
copies,
all
of
them
are
handed
over
to
m*
distinct
relays
with
finite
expected
delay,
while
if
m
exceeds
m*
the
additional
copies
cannot
be
handed
over
with
finite
expected
delay.
Condition
C3
thus
imposes
that
the
source
can
actually
relay
m
distinct
copies
of
the
message;
while
condition
C4
guarantees
that
the
destination
meets
at
least
one
of
the
used
relays
with
finite
expected
delay.
These
theoretical
conditions
can
be
used
to
decide
which
protocols
to
use
given
a
configuration
of
intermeeting
times.
For
example,
let
us
consider
the
case
of
a
network
of
N=10
nodes,
and
define
the
following
set
of
exponents
whose
components
are
denoted
as
1,
,
N-1.
We
assume
that
a
generic
node
i
meets
all
the
other
nodes
in
a
way
such
that
i,1=
1,
,
i,N=
N-1.
We
also
consider
the
case
where
the
source
node
is
1
and
the
destination
node
10.
According
to
the
above
results,
the
expected
delay
for
the
Direct
Transmission
is
not
defined,
because
1,10
=
1.3,
while
it
should
be
greater
than
2
for
convergence.
Analogously,
the
convergence
condition
for
the
1-copy
2-hop
scheme
is
not
satisfied
because
of
condition
C2.
The
only
scheme
able
to
achieve
a
convergent
expected
delay
is
the
m-copy
2-hop
scheme,
with
m=4.
For
the
three
forwarding
strategies
discussed
above,
we
plot
the
empirical
cumulative
distribution
function
in
Figure
17.
As
expected,
in
the
case
of
4-copy
1-hop
scheme,
the
great
majority
of
messages
(~99.9%)
is
delivered
within
a
short
time
(100s)
from
their
generation.
For
both
the
1-hop
1-copy
and
the
2-hop
1-copy
schemes,
instead,
after
10000
seconds
there
is
still
a
big
fraction
(around
10%)
of
messages
to
be
delivered.
These
long
delays,
predicted
by
our
model,
are
those
that
cause
the
expected
delay
to
diverge.
Figure
17.
Example
of
delays
with
different
forwarding
strategies.
Starting
from
these
results,
we
are
currently
extending
them
in
order
to
take
into
consideration
not
only
social-oblivious
protocols,
but
also
social-aware
protocols,
which
use
context
information
about
the
relays
and
the
destination
in
order
to
take
forwarding
decisions.
For
example,
they
take
into
consideration
the
rate
of
encounter
with
the
destination
as
a
measure
of
fitness
to
relay
towards
it.
We
expect
to
report
these
results
in
the
next
deliverables
of
the
work
package.
34
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
35
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
is
the
first
general
framework
that
takes
into
account
the
social-awareness
of
the
forwarding
process.
Moreover,
results
obtained
for
single-copy
schemes
are
important
to
multi-copy
schemes
as
well.
Consider
for
example
multi-copy
schemes
in
which
replication
can
occur
only
at
the
source
node.
Each
copy
travels
along
a
path
independently
of
the
others.
While
the
delivery
from
the
source
node
to
the
first
relays
is
significantly
different
from
a
single-copy
delivery
due
to
the
multi-copy
generation,
from
the
first
relay
to
the
destination
the
delay
can
be
approximated
using
single-copy
results.
The
extension
of
the
framework
to
the
multi-copy
case
is
currently
under
study.
4.2.1 General
framework
for
modelling
the
delay
Due
to
its
flexibility,
we
use
a
semi-Markov
process
with
N
states
(N
being
the
number
of
nodes
in
the
network)
to
model
the
opportunistic
forwarding
process.
A
semi-Markov
process
is
one
that
changes
state
in
accordance
with
a
Markov
chain
(called
embedded
or
jump
chain)
but
where
transitions
between
states
can
take
a
random
amount
of
time
with
an
arbitrary
distribution
[35].
As
such,
it
is
fully
described
by
the
transition
matrix
associated
with
its
embedded
chain
and
by
Ti,
i
=
0,N,
where
Ti
denotes
the
distribution
of
the
time
that
the
semi-Markov
process
spends
in
state
i
before
making
a
transition.
We
express
our
semi-Markov
process
associated
with
the
single-copy
message
forwarding
process
in
terms
of
the
embedded
Markov
chain
in
Figure
18
Figure
18.
Semi-Markov
chain
for
the
general
delay
modelling
framework.
Assuming
that
node
i
is
currently
holding
a
message
whose
destination
is
d,
the
probability
pijd
that
node
i
will
delegate
the
forwarding
of
the
message
to
another
node
j
is
a
function
of
both
the
likelihood
of
meeting
node
j
and
the
probability
that
node
i
will
hand
over
the
message
to
node
j
according
to
the
forwarding
policy
in
use.
It
is
simple
to
write
the
delay
from
node
i
to
the
destination
as
follows
(2)
where
Tij
denotes
the
time
before
node
i
hands
over
the
message
to
node
j
conditioned
on
the
fact
that
j
is
the
first
encountered
suitable
next
hop
for
node
i
(corresponding
to
the
time
before
the
chain
moves
from
state
i
to
state
j),
and
pij
is
the
probability
that
node
j
is
actually
the
first
encountered
suitable
next
hop
for
node
i
(a
similar
equation
can
be
found
for
the
number
of
hops).
The
first
two
moments
of
the
delay
can
then
be
written
as
follows.
(3)
(4)
Equations
(3)
and
(4)
are
extremely
powerful,
as
they
allow
us
to
completely
characterize
the
first
two
moments
of
the
single-copy
delay
and
number
of
hops.
By
knowing
the
first
two
moments,
we
can
use,
for
example,
the
moment
matching
approximation
technique
[40]
to
compute
the
approximate
distribution
of
the
delay,
thus
completely
characterizing
it.
Note
that
Equation
(3)
has
an
intuitive
explanation:
the
expected
value
of
the
delay
from
node
i
is
the
expected
time
to
exit
from
node
i
(because
of
an
encounter
MOTO
Consortium
2013
36
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
generating
a
forwarding
event),
plus
the
average
delay
from
any
possible
relay
j
to
node
d,
weighted
by
the
probability
that
node
i
encounters
relay
j
and
forwards
the
message
to
it
(pij).
The
first
and
second
moments
can
be
computed
when
pij,
Tij
and
Ti
are
characterised.
This
can
still
be
done
in
general,
i.e.
irrespective
of
the
specific
forwarding
protocols
used.
Then,
these
expressions
can
be
customised
and
converted
in
closed
form
expressions
for
each
specific
protocol.
To
provide
a
general
idea,
let
us
focus
on
the
derivation
of
pij.
Denoting
with
Rij
the
residual
intermeeting
time
between
node
i
and
j,
and
with
Ri
the
set
of
possible
relays
that
i
may
consider
for
destination
d
according
to
the
specific
forwarding
protocol,
we
obtain
(5)
Basically,
Equation
(5)
tells
that
the
probability
that
node
i
uses
j
as
forwarder
is
the
probability
that
j
is
the
first
node
encountered
by
i
among
those
that
it
will
use
as
forwarders
towards
destination
d.
4.2.2 Using
the
general
framework:
concrete
examples
In
this
section
we
exemplify
how
the
proposed
framework
can
be
used
to
assess
the
performance
of
the
Direct
Transmission,
Always
Forward,
Two
Hop,
Direct
Acquaintance,
and
Social
Forwarding
schemes
in
such
cases.
Direct
Transmission
and
Two
Hop
have
been
introduced
already
in
Section
4.1.
Always
Forward
is
basically
Epidemic
Routing.
Direct
Acquaintance
and
Social
Forwarding
are
representative
of
social-aware
policies.
Both
forward
according
to
a
gradient
of
fitness
with
respect
to
the
given
destination.
In
the
former
case,
fitness
is
computed
as
the
rate
of
direct
encounter
with
the
destination,
while
in
the
latter
indirect
contacts
(i.e.,
contacts
mediated
from
other
nodes)
are
also
considered.
We
consider
two
mobility
scenarios,
falling
in
the
category
of
social-oriented
mobility
models
(which
are
the
reference
class
for
opportunistic
networks).
The
two
scenarios
are
represented
in
Figure
19
(left)
and
(right).
In
both
cases,
nodes
are
divided
in
three
communities.
Most
of
the
nodes
move
only
inside
their
reference
community,
while
a
few
nodes
(travellers)
move
across
different
communities,
thus
representing
bridges
among
them
(travellers
are
the
only
way
for
messages
to
travel
across
communities).
In
Scenario
1,
all
communities
have
one
traveller
towards
the
other
communities,
while
in
Scenario
2
there
is
only
one
community
with
two
travellers,
one
for
each
of
the
other
communities.
Clearly,
Scenario
2
is
much
more
challenging
from
a
forwarding
standpoint.
In
both
scenarios
we
considered
both
exponential
and
Pareto
intermeeting
times,
fixing
the
average
intermeeting
times
of
regular
nodes
and
travellers
appropriately.
Figure
20
show
the
forwarding
performance
as
far
as
the
delay
is
concerned
for
scenario
1
and
exponential
mobility.
Specifically,
we
compute
from
the
model
the
expected
delay
E[Dij]
for
all
pairs
i,j,
and
we
plot
in
Figure
20
the
distribution
of
the
expected
delay
(across
all
pairs).
The
Direct
Transmission
scheme
suffers
when
the
source
and
the
destination
of
the
message
do
not
get
in
touch
with
each
other
directly,
thus
producing
infinite
delays.
This
is
because,
with
Direct
Transmission,
nodes
can
only
deliver
their
messages
directly
to
the
destination,
thus
missing
all
the
opportunities
offered
by
relaying:
when
the
destination
is
never
met,
the
message
cannot
be
delivered.
However,
relaying
does
not
always
guarantee
a
better
performance
in
terms
of
expected
delay,
as
the
Two
Hop
case
in
Figure
20
shows.
Recall
that
the
expected
MOTO
Consortium
2013
37
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
delay
is
a
weighted
average
of
the
expected
delay
of
each
possible
path.
Thus,
if
there
exists
even
a
single
path
with
infinite
expected
delay,
the
overall
expected
delay
will
diverge.
This
is
exactly
what
happens
with
the
Two
Hop
strategy:
due
to
the
blind
selection
of
the
next
hop,
messages
can
take
a
wrong
path
at
the
first
hop,
and
then
they
get
stuck
there
because
the
intermediate
relay
node
never
meets
the
destination.
In
this
scenario,
such
sequence
of
events
is
possible
for
all
(i,j)
source-destination
pairs
such
that
either
(a)
source
node
i
and
destination
node
j
neither
are
traveler
nor
are
in
the
same
community
or
(b)
source
node
i
is
a
traveler.
In
both
cases
there
are
some
paths
that
achieve
a
finite
expected
delay,
but
there
are
also
paths
with
infinite
expected
delay,
and
the
latter
drag
the
overall
expected
delay
to
infinite.
Comparing
the
Two
Hop
scheme
with
the
Direct
Transmission
strategy,
in
case
(a)
the
fraction
of
node
pairs
that
experience
an
infinite
expected
delay
is
the
same
under
both
protocols.
In
the
second
case,
instead,
i.e.,
when
source
node
i
is
a
traveler,
among
the
possible
paths
that
are
added
by
the
Two
Hop
scheme
with
respect
to
the
Direct
Transmission
strategy,
there
are
some
characterized
by
an
infinite
delay,
and
those
paths
drag
to
infinite
the
expected
delay
for
the
Two
Hop
scheme,
even
if
the
direct
encounter
between
the
traveler
and
the
destination
would
have
a
finite
expectation.
As
an
example
of
the
first
case,
consider
a
message
with
source
node
in
community
C1
and
destination
node
in
community
C2.
In
addition,
assume
that
the
source
and
destination
nodes
are
not
travelers.
If
the
first
encounter
of
the
source
node
is
with
the
traveler
connecting
C1
and
C3,
the
message
will
be
handed
over
to
this
node.
However,
this
traveler
never
gets
in
touch
directly
with
the
destination
in
community
C2,
and
the
message
will
never
be
delivered.
As
for
the
second
case,
when
the
traveler
is
the
source
of
the
message
(with
destination
in
community
C1,
for
example),
there
is
always
a
non-negligible
probability
that,
at
the
time
the
message
is
generated,
the
traveler
is
roaming
in
a
community
(C3,
for
example)
different
from
the
one
in
which
the
destination
resides.
In
this
case,
the
message
will
be
handed
over
to
the
first
encountered
node,
which,
in
our
example,
belongs
to
C3
and
which
will
never
meet
the
destination.
Direct
Acquaintance,
Social
Forwarding,
and
Always
Forward
are
able
to
exploit
the
social
bridges
between
communities
and
to
hand
over
the
message
to
the
convenient
node.
The
Always
Forward
approach,
however,
forwards
totally
at
random,
and
many
hops
may
be
required
before
the
message
eventually
finds,
by
chance,
its
destination.
Social
strategies
are
instead
able
to
choose
the
relays
providing
the
best
trade-
off
between
low
delay
and
efficient
use
of
resources.
Note
also
that
in
this
scenario
Direct
Acquaintance
and
Social
Forwarding
show
the
same
performance.
In
fact,
they
only
differ
when
transitivity
of
contacts
needs
to
be
exploited
for
successful
delivery,
which
is
the
case
of
the
scenario
discussed
in
the
next
section.
Figure
20.
Distribution
of
the
delay
in
Scenario
1
(exponential
mobility).
Figure
21
shows
the
same
results
for
Scenario
2.
The
Direct
Transmission,
Two
Hop,
and
Direct
Acquaintance
schemes
are
not
able
to
deliver
a
subset
of
messages.
In
the
case
of
the
Direct
Transmission
scheme
the
reason
lies
in
the
absence
of
direct
contacts
between
the
source
of
a
message
and
its
destination.
The
Two
Hop
scheme
again
suffers
from
the
problem
of
messages
that
move
away
from
their
source
node
and
get
stuck
at
intermediate
relays.
In
the
case
of
the
Direct
Acquaintance
policy,
losses
are
due
to
the
fact
that
a
node
hands
over
a
message
to
another
node
that
has
a
higher
probability
of
meeting
MOTO
Consortium
2013
38
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
the
destination,
measured
in
terms
of
direct
encounters
only.
The
traveler
that
visits
C2
does
not
meet
any
nodes
of
C3
directly,
thus
it
is
not
considered
a
good
relay
for
destinations
in
C3
by
the
Direct
Acquaintance
scheme.
However,
that
traveler
will
meet
in
C1
the
other
traveler
that
visits
C3
and
thus
it
can
be
considered,
indirectly,
a
good
forwarder
for
C3
by
nodes
that
roam
only
in
C2.
For
this
reason,
a
more
efficient
strategy
should
also
consider
the
transitivity
of
opportunities
(e.g.,
node
a
meets
b,
which
in
turn
meets
c,
thus
a
can
be
considered
a
good
relay
for
destination
c).
This
transitivity
of
encounters
is
detected
by
the
Social
Forwarding
strategy,
which,
for
this
reason,
is
able
to
deliver
all
messages
to
their
destinations.
The
Always
Forward
strategy
is,
as
before,
able
to
deliver
all
messages,
but
using
many
relays,
even
more
than
in
the
previous
scenario.
The
reason
is
that,
being
the
forwarding
opportunities
so
limited,
with
the
Always
Forward
strategy
the
destination
is
typically
found
by
chance
after
many
(bad)
relays
have
been
used.
Figure
21.
Distribution
of
the
delay
in
Scenario
2
(exponential
mobility).
39
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
5 Next
steps
Despite
far
from
being
complete,
we
think
that
the
results
presented
in
this
deliverable
are
relevant
and
interesting
for
the
MOTO
objectives,
and
the
objectives
of
WP3
in
particular.
The
three
lines
we
have
pursued
and
reported
in
this
document
have
produced
interesting
results,
in
order
to
(i)
characterise
the
limitations
of
LTE
networks
in
providing
sufficient
throughput
to
individual
users;
(ii)
defining
a
reference
system
for
integrating
LTE
and
opportunistic
networks,
which
also
highlights
key
aspect
to
focus
on
in
terms
of
capacity
enhancements,
and
(iii)
characterise
the
capacity
of
opportunistic
networks.
Starting
from
these
results,
there
are
two
main
directions
that
we
need
to
pursue
(remember
that,
as
planned,
this
document
does
not
cover
the
entire
spectrum
of
activities
of
WP3,
but
is
mainly
related
to
Task
3.2).
On
the
one
hand,
we
need
to
complete
the
investigations
in
these
three
lines
of
research.
There
are
still
many
aspects
to
be
investigated
more
deeply
about
the
performance
of
LTE,
such
as
multi-cell
configurations
and
unsaturated
traffic
conditions.
We
need
to
derive
analytical
tools
to
predict
its
performance
from
a
given
scenario.
We
need
to
complete
the
activities
on
modelling
the
capacity
of
opportunistic
networks.
We
need
to
refine
the
characterisation
of
the
opportunities
and
performance
limits
of
solutions
like
Push&Track.
On
the
other
hand,
we
need
to
put
the
individual
pieces
together.
This
will
be
mainly
achieved
by
deriving
models
of
the
capacity
of
an
integrated
network
(including
both
wireless
infrastructures
and
opportunistic
communications),
and
characterising
the
resulting
capacity
gain,
taking
systems
like
Push&Track
as
reference.
These
models
will
provide
tools
in
the
hand
of
the
operators,
to
decide
how
to
configure
the
offloading
process
when
additional
capacity
is
needed
and
the
infrastructure
alone
cannot
cope
with
the
demand
of
the
users.
These
activities
will
be
synergic
to
the
rest
of
the
work
package.
In
particular,
as
will
be
described
in
D3.2,
work
is
already
ongoing
in
T3.1
to
characterise
the
impact
of
different
contact
patterns
on
the
capacity
of
the
network,
taking
in
particular
consideration
the
case
of
duty
cycling
and
energy
saving
policies.
Results
from
T3.1
will
be
part
of
the
final
model
for
the
capacity
of
the
opportunistic
network
and
of
the
integrated
network.
In
addition,
scheduling
policies
studied
in
T3.3
will
benefit
from
these
results,
as
scheduling
decisions
may
be
taken
also
based
on
the
expected
capacity
available
on
the
different
parts
of
the
network.
Finally,
the
results
presented
in
this
deliverable
will
start
feeding
the
work
in
WP4
(which
has
just
started)
on
the
design
of
the
control
aspects
of
the
offloading
process,
and
the
detailed
protocols
for
data
dissemination
through
device-to-device
communication
in
the
integrated
infrastructure
and
opportunistic
network.
40
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
References
[1] ns-3
Model
Library
Release
ns-3.17,
May
14,
2013.
[2] M.Hata,
Empirical
formula
for
propagation
loss
in
land
mobile
radio
services,
IEEE
Trans.
on
Vehicular
Technology,
vol.
29,
pp.
317-325,
1980.
[3] Digital
Mobile
Radio:
COST
231
View
on
the
Evolution
Towards
3rd
Generation
Systems,
Commission
of
the
European
Communities,
L-2920,
Luxembourg,
1989.
[4] 3GPP
TR
36.814
E-UTRA
Further
advancements
for
E-UTRA
physical
layer
aspects.
[5] 3GPP
TS
36.211
E-UTRA
Physical
Channels
and
Modulation
[6] 3GPP
TS
36.213
E-UTRA
Physical
layer
procedures
[7] FemtoForum
LTE
MAC
Scheduler
Interface
Specification
v1.11
[8] 3GPP
TS
36.104
E-UTRA
Base
Station
(BS)
radio
transmission
and
reception
[9] S.
Sesia,
I.
Toufik
and
M.
Baker,
LTE
-
The
UMTS
Long
Term
Evolution
-
from
theory
to
practice,
Wiley,
2009
[10] 3GPP
R1-081483
Conveying
MCS
and
TB
size
via
PDCCH
[11] Francesco
Capozzi,
Giuseppe
Piro,
Luigi
Alfredo
Grieco,
Gennaro
Boggia,
Pietro
Camarda:
Downlink
Packet
Scheduling
in
LTE
Cellular
Networks:
Key
Design
Issues
and
a
Survey.
IEEE
Communications
Surveys
and
Tutorials
15(2):
678-700
(2013)
[12] A.
Al
Hanbali,
A.
Kherani,
P.
Nain,
Simple
models
for
the
performance
evaluation
of
a
class
of
two-hop
relay
protocols,
in:
IFIP
NETWORK-
ING'07,
2007,
pp.
191{202.
[13] M.
Barbera,
J.
Stefa,
A.
Viana,
M.
de
Amorim
et
M.
Boc,
VIP
delegation:
Enabling
vips
to
offload
data
in
wireless
social
mobile
networks,
in
ACM
International
Workshop
on
Challenged
Networks,
Las
Vegas,
NV,
USA,
2011.
[14] Chiara
Boldrini,
Marco
Conti
and
Andrea
Passarella,
Less
is
More:
Long
Paths
Do
Not
Help
the
Convergence
of
Social-Oblivious
Forwarding
in
Opportunistic
Networks,
Third
International
Workshop
on
Mobile
Opportunistic
Networks
(ACM
MobiOpp
2012),
Zurich,
Switzerland,
15-16
March
2012.
[15] C.
Boldrini,
M.
Conti,
A.
Passarella,
Exploiting
users'
social
relations
to
forward
data
in
opportunistic
networks:
The
HiBOp
solution,
Pervasive
and
Mobile
Computing
4
(5)
(2008)
633{657.
[16] P.
Bremaud,
Gibbs
fields,
Monte
Carlo
simulation,
and
queues,
Springer,1999
[17] S.
Burleigh,
A.
Hooke,
L.
Torgerson,
K.
Fall,
V.
Cerf,
B.
Durst,
K.
Scott,
and
H.
Weiss,
Delay-Tolerant
Networking:
An
Approach
to
Interplanetary
Internet,
IEEE
Comm.
Magazine,
vol.
41,
no.
6,
pp.
128-136,
June
2003.
[18] H.
Cai,
D.
Eun,
Crossing
over
the
bounded
domain:
From
exponential
to
power-law
intermeeting
time
in
mobile
ad
hoc
networks,
IEEE/ACM
Transactions
on
Networking
(TON)
17
(5)
(2009)
1578{1591.
[19] I.
Carreras,
D.
Miorandi
et
I.
Chlamtac,
A
framework
for
opportunistic
forwarding
in
disconnected
networks,
in
ICST
International
Conference
on
Mobile
and
Ubiquitous
Systems:
Computing,
Networking
and
Services
(MobiQuitous),
San
Jose,
CA,
USA,
2006.
MOTO
Consortium
2013
41
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
[20] A.
Chaintreau,
P.
Hui,
J.
Crowcroft,
C.
Diot,
R.
Gass,
and
J.
Scott.
Impact
of
human
mobility
on
opportunistic
forwarding
algorithms.
IEEE
Trans.
Mobile
Comput.,
pages
606-620,
2007.
[21] Y.
Chen,
V.
Borrel,
M.
Ammar,
and
E.
Zegura,
A
Framework
for
Characterizing
the
Wireless
and
Mobile
Network
Continuum,
ACM
SIGCOMM
Computer
Comm.
Rev.,
vol.
41,
pp.
5-13,
2011.
[22] V.
Conan,
J.
Leguay,
and
T.
Friedman.
Characterizing
pairwise
inter-contact
patterns
in
delay
tolerant
networks.
In
Autonomics'07,
2007.
[23] E.
Daly,
M.
Haahr,
Social
network
analysis
for
information
flow
in
disconnected
Delay-Tolerant
MANETs,
IEEE
Trans.
Mobile
Comput.
(2008)
606{621.
[24] W.
Gao,
Q.
Li,
B.
Zhao,
and
G.
Cao.
Multicasting
in
delay
tolerant
networks:
a
social
network
perspective.
In
ACM
MobiHoc'09,
pages
299-308.
ACM,
2009.
[25] M.
Grossglauser
and
D.
Tse.
Mobility
increases
the
capacity
of
ad
hoc
wireless
networks.
IEEE/ACM
Trans.
on
Netw.,
10(4):477-486,
2002.
[26]
B.
Han,
P.
Hui,
V.
Kumar,
M.
Marathe,
J.
Shao
et
A.
Srinivasan,
Mobile
data
offloading
through
opportunistic
communications,
IEEE
Trans.
Mobile
Comput.,
vol.
11,
n
15,
p.
821834,
2011.
[27] P.
Hui,
J.
Crowcroft,
E.
Yoneki,
Bubble
rap:
Social-based
forwarding
in
delay
tolerant
networks,
IEEE
Trans.
Mobile
Comput.
10
(11)
(2011)
1576
{1589.
[28] S.
Jain,
K.
Fall,
and
R.
Patra,
Routing
in
a
Delay
Tolerant
Network,
Proc.
ACM
SIGCOMM,
2004.
[29] M.
Karaliopoulos,
Assessing
the
vulnerability
of
DTN
data
relaying,
IEEE
Communications
Letters,
vol.
13,
n
12,
pp.
923--925,
2009.
[30] C.
Lee,
D.
Eun,
Exploiting
Heterogeneity
in
Mobile
Opportunistic
Networks:
An
Analytic
Approach,
in:
IEEE
SECON'10,
IEEE,
2010,
pp.
1{9.
[31] A.
Lindgren,
A.
Doria,
O.
Schelen,
Probabilistic
routing
in
intermittently
connected
networks,
LNCS
(2004)
239{254.
[32] L.
Pelusi,
A.
Passarella,
and
M.
Conti,
Opportunistic
Networking:
Data
Forwarding
in
Disconnected
Mobile
Ad
Hoc
Networks,
IEEE
Comm.
Magazine,
vol.
44,
no.
11,
pp.
134-141,
Nov.
2006.
[33] A.
Picu,
T.
Spyropoulos
et
T.
Hossmann,
An
analysis
of
the
information
spreading
delay
in
heterogeneous
mobility
DTNs,
in
IEEE
WoWMoM,
San
Francisco,
CA,
USA,
2012.
[34] I.
Rhee,
M.
Shin,
S.
Hong,
K.
Lee,
S.
Kim,
and
S.
Chong.
On
the
levy-walk
nature
of
human
mobility.
IEEE/ACM
Trans.
on
Netw.,
19(3):630-643,
2011.
[35] S.
Ross,
Introduction
to
probability
models,
Academic
Press,
2007.
[36] M.
Seshadri,
S.
Machiraju,
A.
Sridharan,
J.
Bolot,
C.
Faloutsos,
and
J.
Leskovec.
Mobile
call
graphs:
beyond
power-
law
and
lognormal
distributions.
In
ACM
SIGKDD'08,
pages
596-604.
ACM,
2008.
[37] T.
Spyropoulos,
K.
Psounis,
C.
Raghavendra,
Efficient
routing
in
intermittently
connected
mobile
networks:
The
multiple-copy
case,
IEEE/ACM
Trans.
on
Netw.
16
(1)
(2008)
77{90.
[38] T.
Spyropoulos,
K.
Psounis,
C.
Raghavendra,
Efficient
routing
in
intermittently
connected
mobile
networks:
The
single
copy
case,
IEEE/ACM
Trans.
on
Netw.
16
(1)
(2008)
63{76.
MOTO
Consortium
2013
42
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
[39] T.
Spyropoulos,
T.
Turletti,
K.
Obraczka,
Routing
in
Delay-Tolerant
Networks
Comprising
Heterogeneous
Node
Populations,
IEEE
Trans.
Mobile
Comput.
(2009)
1132{1147.
[40] H.
Tijms,
J.
Wiley,
A
first
course
in
stochastic
models,
Vol.
2,
Wiley
Online
Library,
2003.
[41] P.
Tournoux,
J.
Leguay,
F.
Benbadis,
V.
Conan,
M.
De
Amorim,
J.
Whitbeck,
The
accordion
phenomenon:
Analysis,
characterization,
and
impact
on
dtn
routing,
in:
INFOCOM
2009,
IEEE,
2009,
pp.
1116{1124.
[42] A.
Vahdat,
D.
Becker,
Epidemic
routing
for
partially
connected
ad
hoc
networks,
Tech.
rep.
(2000).
[43] John
Whitbeck,
Marcelo
Dias
de
Amorim,
Yoann
Lopez,
Jeremie
Leguay,
Vania
Conan:
Relieving
the
wireless
infrastructure:
When
opportunistic
networks
meet
guaranteed
delays.
WOWMOM
2011:
1-10.
[44] X.
Zhang,
G.
Neglia,
J.
Kurose,
D.
Towsley,
Performance
modeling
of
epidemic
routing,
Computer
Networks
51
(10)
(2007)
2867:2891.
43
D3.1
Initial
results
on
offloading
foundations
and
enablers
DISCLAIMER
The
information
in
this
document
is
provided
"as
is",
and
no
guarantee
or
warranty
is
given
that
the
information
is
fit
for
any
particular
purpose.
The
above
referenced
consortium
members
shall
have
no
liability
for
damages
of
any
kind
including
without
limitation
direct,
special,
indirect,
or
consequential
damages
that
may
result
from
the
use
of
these
materials
subject
to
any
liability
which
is
mandatory
due
to
applicable
law.
Copyright
2013
by
Thales
Communications
&
Security
SA,
Consiglio
Nazionale
delle
Ricerche,
Asociacin
de
Empresas
Tecnolgicas
Innovalia,
Universite
Pierre
et
Marie
Curie
-
Paris
6,
FON
wireless
ltd,
Avea
Iletisim
Hizmetleri
As,
Centro
Ricerche
Fiat
Scpa,
Intecs
Informatica
e
Tecnologia
del
Software
s.p.a.
All
rights
reserved.
44