Differentiated Routing in Multi-Hop Wireless Networks

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Multi-hop, multi-radio wireless networks face challenges in providing differentiated routing for high priority traffic, such as public safety communications, while ensuring that lower priority traffic does not traverse dedicated high priority links or spectrums.

Innovation Solution

The implementation of a method that modifies mesh network architectures to differentiate usage permissions between traffic categories by using a combined link metric that biases in favor of links supporting all categories of traffic, and employs intelligent interface selection and packet tagging to ensure high priority traffic uses dedicated links, while preventing lower priority traffic from using these links.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Productivity

If lower priority traffic is allowed to traverse all available links to maximize network utilization, then network productivity is improved, but reliability of high priority traffic is degraded due to potential congestion and interference on dedicated links

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvenetwork utilizationVSAvoidhigh priority traffic reliability

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The network links are segmented into two categories: dedicated high priority links (type 1) and shared links (type 2). This segmentation allows the routing system to differentiate between links that must exclusively carry high priority traffic and links that can serve both high and low priority traffic, thereby ensuring high priority reliability while maintaining overall network productivity through efficient utilization of shared links.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Different quality requirements are applied to different parts of the network based on traffic priority. High priority traffic is routed through dedicated links with guaranteed quality, while lower priority traffic utilizes shared links. This local quality differentiation ensures that critical communications maintain reliability even when the network is under heavy load from lower priority traffic.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

2Reliability

If differentiated routing is implemented to ensure high priority traffic uses dedicated links, then reliability of high priority traffic is improved, but device complexity increases due to additional routing logic and link classification requirements

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvehigh priority traffic reliabilityVSAvoidrouting logic complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

Link classification into type 1 (dedicated) and type 2 (shared) is performed in advance before routing decisions are needed. The routing tables are pre-computed with separate entries for high priority and low priority traffic, indicating which next-hop links to use for each priority level. This preliminary classification and pre-computation significantly reduces the complexity of real-time routing decisions, as nodes only need to look up pre-determined paths rather than performing complex real-time analysis.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The routing system uses distinct metric parameters for different traffic priorities. High priority routing uses metrics that favor dedicated type 1 links, while low priority routing uses metrics that can utilize both type 1 and type 2 links. By changing the routing metric parameters based on traffic priority, the system achieves differentiated routing without requiring complex routing logic, as standard shortest-path algorithms can be applied with different parameters for different priorities.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

3Reliability

If separate routing tables are maintained for high and low priority traffic, then reliability of high priority traffic is improved, but memory requirements and processing overhead increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvehigh priority traffic reliabilityVSAvoidprocessing overhead

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSUse of energy by moving object

Solution Approach 1:

A single unified routing table structure is designed to serve both high priority and low priority traffic routing needs. The routing table includes link type information that enables it to function as both a dedicated high priority routing table and a shared low priority routing table. This multi-functional design eliminates the need for completely separate routing tables, reducing memory requirements and processing overhead while still maintaining the ability to provide differentiated routing for different traffic priorities.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Data Source

PatentUS8811234B2System and method to provide differentiated routing in multi-hop multi-radio wireless networks

Publication Date: 2014.08.19 ARRIS ENTERPRISES LLC

AI summary

A method provides for differentiating usage permissions between different categories of communication traffic within a given network. The method includes ensuring one or more categories of traffic never transits communication radios, link, and/or spectrums dedicated to a different category of traffic. A combined routing metric is calculated using a scaling factor for discouraging usage of restricted communication links and encouraging usage of non-restricted communication links.