A novel architecture for QoS provision on VANET

Abstract

Vehicle Ad-Hoc Network (VANET) applications are proposed in the literature to provide a certain degree of Quality of Service (QoS) to vehicles. Nevertheless, VANET experiences high mobility, dynamic topology and propagation irregularity. These characteristics make the QoS requirements in VANET a challenging issue. In this paper, we propose a novel VANET architecture along with quality of service metrics to allow better QoS provision and an efficient call admission control. Index Terms-VANET; QoS model; Admission Control; QoS management. I. INTRODUCTIONVehicular Ad-Hoc Networking (VANET) has become an attractive research topic in wireless communication. In order to improve and secure the driver's experience, several innovative applications were developed. In particular, safety and comfort applications have been considered in VANET including driver's safety applications, multimedia entertainment, and internet browsing. Each one of these applications should comply with specific requirements that are defined according to the driver's needs and the nature of the provided service. While driver's safety applications are time-critical, other applications are bandwidth intensive. Obviously, any Quality of service (QoS) model provided for VANET should be able to cope with the variety of the aforementioned requirements. Thereby, QoS provisioning in VANET pose a real challenge.One can notices that available research works addressing this issue fail to provide constraining QoS. In particular, routing has been the major issue addressed to handle QoS limited constraints [1], [2]. In [1] authors proposed a scheme allowing the selection and maintenance of one routing path and one backup routing path, having longer expiration times as calculated using relative velocity and node direction. However, the path selection is made based only on the expiration time of the link. Thus, this scheme cannot guarantee the required QoS level in term of other metrics (e.g. Loss, Throughput).With regards to the QoS metrics for efficient communication in VANET, authors in [2] proposed the link lifetime-related metric to optimize route construction. Contrary to [1], the process in [2] does not assume knowledge of the relative velocity vectors or mobility model, whereas the estimates go beyond describing the tendency in terms of the radio propagation. Thus, we identify the importance of living link metric in the provision of QoS in VANET. In [3], a Delay Tolerant Routing protocol (DTRP) is proposed while satisfying QoS constraints on tolerable delay and bandwidth usage by maximizing the connectivity probability of the route between mobile nodes and the gateway based on a genetic algorithm.

NCaAC: Network Coding-Aware Admission Control for Prioritized Data Dissemination in Vehicular Ad Hoc Networks

“…However, the proposed admission control scheme merely takes the IDR as the sole QoS metric, which is far from perfect. Reference [11] considered the scenario where vehicles are divided into multiple clusters, and RSUs are seen as the network access points forming in tree topology. An admission control scheme was proposed which employs multiple metrics of QoS (i.e., packet loss ratio, throughput, and average delay) to determine whether new vehicles should be allowed to enter a cluster without affecting the QoS of existing vehicles in the cluster.…”

“…e original IDNCassisted algorithms without admission control are labeled as EDF, SIN, and PVDD, respectively. e algorithms with (1) If R i receives a newly arriving request r i then (2) Determine the priority of r i ; (3) if r i is high priority then (4) Admit r i and put r i into the high priority service queue; (5) else (6) Vectorize r i as rv ij , the mean vector of VE α as rv α , and the mean vector of VE β as rv β ; (7) Calculate rv α and rv β as described in Section 4.2.1; (8) Calculate the distance between rv ij and rv α , and the distance between rv ij and rv β , respectively; (9) Compare the distances (10) if dist(rv ij , rv α ) ≤ dist(rv ij , rv β ) then (11) Reject r i ; (12) Send a rejection message to the vehicle; (13) else (14) if dist(rv ij , rv α ) > dist(rv ij , rv β ) then (15) Admit r i and put r i into the low priority service queue; (16) end if (17) end if (18) end if (19) network coding-aware admission control are denoted as EDF_NCaAC, SIN_NCaAC, and PVDD_NCaAC. e results are obtained when the system is in a steady state and all data points are based on the average of over 5000 simulation runs.…”

“…e existing admission control schemes for mobile ad hoc networks or wireless networks cannot directly fit in VANETs, and appropriate admission control mechanism should be designed according to the characteristics of vehicle nodes. Currently, a number of studies that apply admission control in VANETs indicate that admission control can reasonably allocate network resources and efficiently control system load, thus having great potential in providing satisfying QoS [11][12][13][14].…”

Quality of User Experience in 5G-VANET

“…In the domain of VANETs, Garai and Boudriga coupled QoS levels with vehicle clusters in a VANET by measuring delay, throughput and packet loss for each cluster and periodically update them [24].…”