Per-flow route selection in multi-hop wireless networks

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

In multi-hop wireless networks, a single route is often selected for all data flows based on a single metric, which may not provide the best performance for different types of data flows, leading to performance degradation for some flows despite benefiting others.

Innovation Solution

Different routes are selected for different data flows based on specific metrics such as bandwidth, latency, and loss rate, allowing the source or destination to choose the best route for each data flow based on its quality of service requirements, either proactively or on-demand, using route metrics measured between nodes in the network.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If a single route is selected for all data flows based on a single metric, then the routing complexity is reduced and ease of operation is improved, but the quality of service for different types of data flows deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:
Improverouting operationVSAvoidquality of service
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the single routing decision into multiple independent routing decisions, one for each data flow. Each data flow is evaluated separately based on its specific requirements, allowing different routes to be selected for different flows. This segmentation enables the system to optimize quality of service for each flow type while maintaining manageable complexity through automated per-flow routing decisions.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces dynamic routing where the route selection changes based on the specific requirements of each data flow. Instead of a static single route for all flows, the system dynamically evaluates and selects appropriate routes based on real-time conditions and flow-specific metrics such as bandwidth requirements, latency sensitivity, and reliability needs.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

2Reliability

If different routes are selected for different data flows based on multiple metrics, then the quality of service for each data flow is improved, but the routing complexity increases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvequality of serviceVSAvoidrouting complexity
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements self-service routing where each data flow automatically selects its own optimal route based on predefined metrics and current network conditions. The routing system evaluates multiple routes against flow-specific requirements and autonomously makes routing decisions without requiring manual configuration or complex centralized control, thereby reducing operational complexity while maintaining high quality of service.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the routing parameters from a single aggregate metric to multiple flow-specific metrics. Each data flow is characterized by different parameters such as bandwidth requirements, latency tolerance, and reliability needs. The routing system adjusts its selection criteria based on these parameter changes, allowing optimized routing decisions that match each flow's specific requirements while using automated algorithms to manage the complexity.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Quantity of substance

If a route with the greatest bandwidth is selected, then bandwidth-intensive data flows benefit, but delay-sensitive data flows may suffer performance degradation

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovebandwidthVSAvoidlatency
Core Design Contradiction:
Quantity of substanceVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by matching specific route characteristics to specific data flow requirements. Instead of using a single route with fixed properties for all flows, the system identifies routes with different local qualities (bandwidth, latency, reliability) and assigns each data flow to the route whose local qualities best match its requirements. Bandwidth-intensive flows receive high-bandwidth routes while delay-sensitive flows receive low-latency routes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The patent changes the routing decision from optimizing for a single parameter (bandwidth) to optimizing for multiple parameters simultaneously. The system evaluates routes based on different parameters depending on the data flow type: bandwidth for bandwidth-intensive flows, latency for delay-sensitive flows, and reliability for critical flows. This parameter-based routing approach allows the system to achieve optimal performance across different flow types by changing the optimization parameter according to flow requirements.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

Data Source

PatentUS8625485B2Data flow routing in a multi-hop wireless network
Publication Date: 2014.01.07 HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE DEV LP
  • US8625485B2 patent drawing
  • US8625485B2 patent drawing
  • US8625485B2 patent drawing

AI summary

A data flow from a source to a destination is routed in a multi-hop wireless network. Nodes are searched in the multi-hop wireless network for information of route metrics for the nodes, the information of the route metrics are received, a route that has a most optimal route metric for the data flow are determined based on the route metrics and a data flow metric of the data flow, and the data flow are received from the source via the route at the destination in the multi-hop wireless network.