A Novel Routing–aware MAC Protocol for Mobile
Ad Hoc Network
Wei Nie1 , Naixue Xiong2
1 3
School of Automation Engineering,
1 3
University of Electronic Science and Technology of China
2 4
Department of Computer Science
2 4
Georgia State University, USA
weiuestc@gmail.com, nxiong@cs.gsu.edu
Abstract—Most of the MAC and routing protocols proposed
for wireless ad hoc networks are based on omni-directional
antenna. Omni-directional antenna distributes energy in all
directions, not only causing unnecessary interference to other
nodes, but also reducing the potential range of the transmission.
In this paper, we propose a novel medium access control and
routing protocols for wireless ad hoc networks that using
directional antennas. Our design mainly focuses on fully
employing the range enhancement of directional communication
in the multi-hop environment. Beside that, our protocol can
alleviate the hidden/exposed terminal problems and node
deafness, which remain unsolved in many directional MAC
protocols. We implement our protocol in the OPNET
environment and study the parameters to optimize its
performance. Our preliminary simulation results indicate that
our protocol works well and achieves considerably high
throughput and low delay in both sparse and dense ad hoc
networks.
Keywords—Ad Hoc Networks, Medium Access Control, Smart
Antennas, Routing Protocol , Performance
I. INTRODUCTION
A variety of MAC and routing protocols have been
proposed for ad hoc network, such as CSMA/CA and other
protocols that employ the handshake mechanism of RTS-CTS
[1],[2], [3], [4], [5],[22],[23]. However, most of these are
based on omni-directional antenna. Omni-directional antenna
distributes energy in all directions, not only causing
unnecessary interference to other nodes, but also reducing the
potential range of the transmission.
In recent years, there has been great interest in using
directional antennas to improve performance of existing MAC
and routing protocols for mobile ad hoc network. By using
direction antennas, or smart antennas, the directional
communication can both enhance spatial reuse and
transmission range simultaneously. Although directional
transmissions can benefit ad-hoc networks, it causes serious
problems, which greatly impair the network performance.
Issues such as new type of hidden terminal, node deafness and
the determination of neighbors’ positions arise, which need to
be properly handled. The hidden and exposed terminals are
introduced by the distributed nature of wireless
communication, making the design of MAC and routing
protocol a rather challenging issue.
978-1-4244-6949-9/10/$26.00 ©2010 IEEE
Jong Hyuk Park3 , Jun Fan4
Department of Computer Science and Engineering,
Seoul National University of Technology, South Korea
School of Computer Science and Technology,
Huazhong University of Science and Technology , China
jhpark1@snut.ac.kr, odbc@tom.com
The core contributions of this paper are as follows. On one
hand, we propose a novel routing-aware MAC protocols that
can effectively alleviate the directional hidden/exposed
terminal problems that seriously degrade spatial reuse. On the
other hand, our protocol can properly address node deafness,
which causes fruitless transmission and degrades the
performance of directional communication. Through these
measures, our protocol can make full use of directional
antennas and enhance parallelism in data transmission. As
demonstrated by the simulation results, our protocol can
greatly improve the traffic carrying capacity and achieve
satisfactory medium access delay, making it suitable for both
sparse and dense ad hoc networks. The rest of this paper is
organized as follows. In Section 2 we summarize some related
works in the area of IEEE 802.11 and some important
directional MAC protocols. In Section 3, we describe our
protocol in detail, including the system assumptions, the
antenna model, the timeslot structure, the channel access
mechanism and collaborate with routing protocol. In section 4,
we present the preliminary simulation results and compare
with IEEE 802.11 MAC protocol. Finally in section 5, we
conclude this paper and highlight some open problems and
future research directions.
II. RELATED WORKS
Quite a few MAC protocols using directional antennas
have been proposed in the past years [6-12] , which are almost
the adaptation of CSMA/CA (in particular IEEE 802.11) for
use over directional antennas.
As the most famous contention-based protocol, IEEE
802.11 MAC protocol uses an access method named the
Distributed Coordination Function, which is a Carrier Sense
Multiple Access with Collision Avoidance. CSMA/CA usually
employs an omni-directional antenna and communicates in the
four-way handshake of RTS/CTS/DATA/ACK. When a node
hears a RTS or CTS, it will set the NAV and defer itself from
access until the end of the corresponding data transmission so
as to avoid collision with the ACK. IEEE 802.11 MAC
protocol can relieve the hidden terminal problem to some
degree, but the exposed terminal problem remains unsolved.
In [8] two schemes were proposed applying directional
antennas. One scheme uses directional RTS and omni-
directional CTS packets in collision avoidance, and then uses
directional data and acknowledgment packets after successful
handshakes. The other scheme uses omni-directional RTS
packets, when the position of a receiver is unknown or all the
transmitting antenna elements are not blocked. These two
schemes show the tradeoff between the possibility of
simultaneous transmissions and the possibility of collisions of
control packets.
A similar MAC protocol using a different scheme is
proposed in [9]. The omni- directional RTS and CTS packets
are first exchanged between the sending and receiving nodes,
and then directional data and acknowledgment packets are
used. The difference between [8] and [9] is that the node can
activate the antenna element(s) pointing to the desired source
while deactivating antenna elements in other directions. In this
way, the receiving node is not influenced by simultaneous
transmissions from other directions.
The problems associated with using directional antennas
are thoroughly studied in [6], such as the hidden terminal due
to asymmetry in gain or unheard RTS/CTS and the node
deafness. Although [6] does not provide a solution to these
issues, it introduces a scheme to take advantage of the higher
gain obtained by directional antennas, by employing
directional multi-hop RTS transmissions to establish
directional-directional links between the transmitter and
receiver. Although this protocol has great throughput
improvement as compared with IEEE 802.11, the entire path to
the intended receiver must be known by the transmitter in
order to route the RTS packets.
The impact of the node deafness on wireless medium
access control is evaluated in [12] and a tone-based directional
MAC protocol (Tone DMAC) is proposed to address this
problem. A sub-band tone is used to notify the neighbors of a
communicating node of its activity. This scheme shows
encouraging performance. However, the additional receiver
hardware as well as radio channel causes relative complexity
in order to implement it.
A MAC protocol is introduced in [11] and declared to fully
exploit directional antennas. The circular directional RTS is
proposed to scan the area around the transmitter. Thus the
neighbors are informed of the intended communication.
Although the impact of deafness can be alleviated, the cost of
control overhead is rather high.
III. THE PROPOSED PROTOCOL
A. The system assumptions
In order for the system to function as desired, we will
assume a fully distributed ad hoc network structure with many
nodes distributed over a two-dimensional, Line of Sight (LOS)
space. Our protocol is named DRMAC (Directional Routing–
aware MAC Protocol), and it has assumptions as follows.
Synchronization by GPS will be used to track time frames and
slots. The precision of the GPS system can provide worldwide
synchronization to within 250 ns, fully satisfying the
synchronization requirement of the system[13]. The internal
clock can be used as a substitute in the absence of a GPS signal.
In addition, each node will be equipped with directional
antennas with both omni-directional and directional modes. At
a signal, the directional antennas can get the DOA of the
signal. We do not concern the method computing the DOA,
which is usually an issue of the physical layer. The nodes will
share a single channel using a half-duplex radio transceiver,
and the channel will remain stationary during control and data
packet transmissions. To enable successful RTS-CTS
handshake procedures, the physical links will be bi-directional.
B. The Antenna Model
Directional antennas systems can be mainly divided into
four major categories that differ in their performance and
transceiver complexity, including switched-beam antennas,
steered-beam antennas, adaptive array antennas, and MIMO
(Multiple-Input-Multiple- Output) links[14],[15]. In this paper,
we assume that each node is equipped with switched-beam
antennas. The antenna model we employed consists of N
antenna elements and spans an angle of degrees, forming
the non-overlapping fixed sectors. We have implemented the
model of the antenna pattern in the OPNET.
As described above, our antenna model possesses two
separate modes: omni-directional and directional. Although
our antenna model can operate only in one mode at a given
time, it can switch between two modes with negligible latency.
In the directional communication mode, we assume that the
antenna model is capable of transmitting or receiving signals
with gain 0dB in the main lobe and -20dB in the side lobes (for
simplicity, we ignore the signal received by the side lobes).
This means that we only study the spatial reuse of directional
antennas in this paper. In next step, we will study the range
enhancement of directional communication in the multi-hop
environment.
C. The Timeslot Structure
As shown in Figure 1, the radio channel is divided into
contiguous transmission slots. Each transmission slot is then
composed of two separate periods: a contention period and a
data period. The contention period consists of multiple
contention cycles, and each contention cycle contains a CRS
slot, an ORTS slot, a DCTS slot, and a DRTS slot. The CRS
(Collision Resolution Signaling) contains multiple mini-slots
for assertion signals. The data period is divided into a DATA
cycle and an ACK cycle. The transmission and reception of
each assertion, RTS, CTS, DATA, and ACK signal is
restricted to their respective responding time slots.
Figure 1. Frame and timeslot organization
 In order to reduce the overhead, we can make the time
interval of the various time slots in DRMAC as short as
possible. However, for the assertion signal mini-slot, we must
include the synchronization accuracy, propagation delay,
detection time, and receive-to- transmit transition time in
order to prevent ambiguity. For RTS, CTS, DATA and ACK
slots, we need to include the synchronization accuracy,
propagation delay, the PLCP Preamble and Header, and MAC
layer overhead (including the MAC header and frame check
sequence).
D. The Channel Access Mechanism
The main idea of DRMAC is that we use different
antenna modes and transmit power for the assertion signal,
ORTS, DCTS, DRTS, DATA and ACK. As indicated by the
name, the assertion signal and ORTS are transmitted in omni-
directional mode, while DCTS, DRTS, DATA and ACK are
transmitted in directional mode.
We adopt the idea of CRS (Collision Resolution Signaling)
for arbitration of medium access [16], [17]. CRS consists of
consecutive signaling phases and assertion signals, and a node
survives CRS by surviving all signaling phases. The signaling
phase is designed by choosing the number of signaling slots
and the signal selection probabilities. We use 9-phase signaling,
which can achieve a better than 0.99 probability that just one
node will survive signaling for contender densities as many as
450 contenders[9].We modify the CRS and transmit the
2
assertion signals with larger power, giving it a range of 2 N n R ,
0
which is twice that of RTS. In this way, we guarantee that RTS
arrives at the receiver node without collision caused by the
hidden terminals.
Surviving the CRS, if a short packet (usually routing
packet or very small user traffic) comes from higher layer, it
will be transmitted without RTS-CTS handshake. If a long
packet of user traffic arrives, RTS-CTS handshake will be
performed and ORTS is transmitted. The format of the RTS
packet is similar to that of the IEEE 802.11, except that the
two-byte field containing the duration is removed.
Different from other directional MAC protocols, ORTS
(as well as the routing packet) is transmitted omni-
2
directionally using larger power and has a range of N n R .
0
1 Since we transact all the transmission and reception of the
Since the CRS survivor has the range twice of N R , the n
0
collision of RTS or the short packet caused by the hidden
terminals at the receiver node can be total eliminated.
In regards to receiving the RTS (in the omni-directional
mode), the receiver node R gets the DOA that will receive the
following data packet. If node R is idle and free of directional
interference (we assume that a node engaged in the sender-
receiver pair marks itself into the busy status, while an idle
node marks itself into the idle status), it will accept the
transmission solicitation from node S. However, if node R has
engaged in a send-receiver pair, or node R is a directional
exposed terminal and has blocked the DOA where RTS comes
from, the transmission solicitation from node S will be rejected.
We use two types of DCTS: the CTS-A (CTS-Acceptance)
and CTS-R (CTS-Rejection). The CTS-A informs the source
node and the neighboring nodes in directional reception range
that a sender-receiver pair has been registered, and the CTS-R
informs only the source node that the transmission solicitation
is rejected. As indicated by the name, DCTS is transmitted in
directional mode (the DOA of the source node is
available).Similarly, DCTS is transmitted directionally using
2
larger power and has a range of（ N n R ）.
0
To receiving the CTS-A (in omni-directional mode), node
S can compute the DOA and knows the antenna element for
transmitting. Since node S may be a directional hidden
terminal, it needs to check whether the antenna element for
transmitting is blocked or not. If the antenna element is not
blocked, the transmission solicitation is permitted. Otherwise
node S has to cancel the transmission in order to avoid
interfering with the registered sender-receiver pairs.
We use two types of DRTS: the RTS-F (RTS-Forward)
and RTS-C (RTS-Cancel). The RTS-F informs the
neighboring nodes in directional transmission range that a
sender-receiver pair has been registered, and the RTS-C
informs only the receiver node that the transmission
solicitation has been cancelled. As indicated by the name,
DRTS is transmitted in directional mode. Receiving the RTS-
C, node R realizes that data transmission has been cancelled
and returns to idle status. Similarly, DRTS is transmitted
2
directionally using larger power and has a range of（ N n R ）..
0
Since the distance between CRS survivors is a two-hop
radius (as described in the following sub-section), the sender-
receiver pairs produced in one contention cycle, or one
CRS/ORTS/DCTS/DRTS handshake, are quite sparse. In order
to improve spatial reuse, we have multiple contention cycles in
the contention period.
After the first contention cycle, except the nodes that are in
the BUSY status, all other nodes can contend for the access of
medium in the rest contention cycles. Consequently, multiple
sender-receiver pairs can be registered in these contention
cycles, and the traffic capability can be significantly enhanced.
In the last step, the DATA/ACK exchange of all the
registered sender-receiver pairs will take place simultaneously.
DATA and ACK packets in the directional-directional
communication mode, these sender-receiver pairs will not
interfere with each other.
The design consideration for DRMAC is an interesting
optimization problem. On one hand, each contention cycle
consumes the wireless channel for some time. Therefore, it is
desirable to minimize the number of contention cycles. On the
other hand, the overhead of contention cycles is amortized
over the multiple data packets transmitted. In section IV, we
conduct extensive simulations to balance the length of
contention periods and data periods according to node density,
traffic generation rate and the number of antenna elements of
the directional antennas we used.
E. Alleviating the Hidden/Exposed Terminals Problem and
Node Deafness
As described above, a receiver node that accepts the
transmission solicitation transmits a CTS-A in the directional
mode. As illustrated in Figure 2, we suppose that node R
transmits a direction CTS-A. Then node A, which is located in
the directional transmission range of node R, receives the
CTS-A and computes the DOA of node R, marking itself as a
directional hidden terminal. In order to protect the sender-
receiver pair of node S and R, node A should not transmit in
the angle from DOA - 360 to DOA + 360 for transmitting.
2N 2N
Since we ignore the signal received by the side lobe of node R,
node B will not interfere with the receiver node R in the
DATA-ACK exchange.
Figure 2. The hidden terminal References
After the successful ORTS/DCTS handshake, the source
node transmits a RTS-F in the directional mode and declares
that a sender-receiver pair has been registered in this
transmission slot. As illustrated in Figure 3, after node C
receives the RTS-F, it marks itself as a directional exposed
terminal. Node C should not receive in the angle from DOA -
360 to DOA + 360 for receiving in this transmission slot.
2N 2N
However, it can transmit.
Figure 3. The exposed terminal
Since CTS-A and RTS-F are transmitted in directional
mode, some neighboring nodes cannot receive these messages.
As a result, they may try to transmit to a node that is in the
busy status in the current transmission slot. In this case, the
receiver node will transmit a CTS-R and inform the source
node to stop the fruitless transmission solicitation, as described
in above channel access mechanism. Hearing the CTS-R, the
source node will give up the transmission attempt in the
current transmission slot and retry in next one.
F. Collaborate with routing protocol
A cross-layer communication will improve the system
capacity and decrease the system delay. In order to confirm the
efficacy of cooperation at the MAC layer, we perform
simulations using information gathered regarding the routing
layer in multi-hop ad-hoc networks. In some scenarios, if we
use omni antenna, two hops are required to get from the source
node to the destination node, however we can only reach the
destination by a direct antenna single-hop transmission. In
order to boost the performance of the routing protocol, the
Cooperative MAC scheme has been implemented in the
contention period. Our simulation results verify the
performance of Routing–aware MAC protocol in multi-hop
ad-hoc networks, and the protocol outperforms the legacy
IEEE 802.11 and MMAC.
In the previous years, several routing protocols have been
suggested for ad hoc networks [20-25]. We classify the routing
protocols for ad hoc networks into two distinct categories:
Proactive (or Table-Driven including DSDV[20] and OLSR)
routing protocols and reactive (or On-Demand including
AODV[18] and DSR[19]) routing protocols. In proactive
routing protocols, nodes exchange routing information with
each other before the information is needed. So each node
maintains an up-to-date route table to all possible destinations.
The On-Demand routing scheme is aimed to reduce the routing
overhead by maintaining route tables based on the necessity. In
most On-Demand routing protocols, a node establishes a route
only when data packets need a new path. Many performance
comparisons have shown that on-demand algorithms perform
better than the proactive algorithms. The important advantage
of source routing is that the intermediate nodes do not need to
maintain up-to-date routing information for forwarding packets,
since the routing information has been cached in the packets
for their own future use.
AODV is a simple and efficient routing protocol designed
specifically for use in multi-hop wireless ad hoc networks of
mobile nodes. It allows the network to be completely self-
organizing and self-configuring, without the need for any
existing network infrastructure or administration. AODV
builds routes using a route request / route reply query cycle.
The sender initializes Route Discovery by broadcasting a
Route Request (RREQ) packet, containing destination node,
unique request identification, and a list (initial empty) of
intermediate nodes traveled by this packet. When the RREQ
packet reaches the target node, it updates the information for
the source node and sets up backwards pointers to the source
node in the route tables. A node receiving the RREQ may send
a route reply (RREP) if it is marked as the destination. In this
case, it unicasts a RREP back to the source. Otherwise, it
rebroadcasts the RREQ. Nodes keep track of the RREQ's
source IP address and broadcast ID. If an already processed
RREQ is received, the RREQ will be discarded and not
forwarded anymore.
 In the AODV protocol, the routing traffic is usually short, in terms of both throughput and delay. The performance of the
the RREQ has a length of 24 bytes and is the longest among DRMAC improves significantly as CC increases, stabilizing at
RREQ, RREP and RERR. Consequently, no matter what kind an optimal CC before degrading. The results demonstrate that
of routing protocol is employed, we can regard that only two at a node density of 49 nodes per square kilometer, the
kinds of packets come from network layer: the short packet of DRMAC performs best at CC8, degrading at higher CC values.
routing traffic and the long packet of user traffic. Our results at CC8 are presented in the figure 4 and figure 5.
The performance of our protocol demonstrated throughput and
The DRMAC transmits the short packet of routing traffic medium access delay using 4-element directional antennas.
(very short user traffic) during the contention period, using the
time interval of the ORTS/DCTS/DRTS handshake, while it Our simulation results suggest a few general trends. As
transmits the long packet of user traffic through the DATA traffic generation rate increases, the throughput of DRMAC,
period. Therefore, the time interval of the contention cycle, MMAC, and IEEE 802.11 increases as well, and the delay of
including the PLCP Preamble and Header and the MAC and IP the three protocols degrades rapidly. Both performances
layer overheads, must be tuned to accommodate the routing eventually stabilize.
packets. For example, because the frame containing the RREQ
of AODV takes a total of 832 bits, the length of each At a node density of 49 nodes per square kilometer, the
throughput of DRMAC is approximately 128% that of MMAC
contention cycle at 1 Mbits per second (excluding the time
interval of the CRS) must be a minimum of 832µs in order to and 336% that of IEEE 802.11. The results also show that the
accommodate the routing traffic of AODV. delay of DRMAC is significantly less than the delay of IEEE
802.11 and slightly less than the delay of MMAC.
IV. SIMULATION RESULTS We believe the improvement in performance is caused by
properly addressing the hidden/exposed terminal problem and
We will divide the area of our ad hoc network into seven the node deafness problem. The most important improvement
rows and seven columns, for a total of 7 x 7 squares over an in our protocol is the range enhancement of fully-employed
area of 1000m x 1000m, and randomize the node position for directional antennas.
each square. We operate under the assumptions that the one-
hop transmission radius is 300m, the synchronization accuracy
is 1µs, the propagation delay is 1µs, the total detection and
receive-to-transmit transition times are 18µs, the PLCP
Preamble and Header is 192 bits, and the MAC layer overhead
is 224 bits. The DRMAC model will be implemented in an
OPNET environment with the following parameters: a 180µs
CRS (nine 20 µs mini slots for assertion signals), a 380µs
ORTS slot, a 340µs DCTS slot, a 360µs DRTS slot, a 8780µs
DATA cycle, a 320µs ACK cycle, a range of 1 to 10
contention cycles, and a 9100µs added to 1220µs times the
number of contention cycles transmission slot time interval.
Our goal is to measure the impact of node density, traffic
generation rate, number of antenna elements, and number of
contention cycles per contention period on network layer
performance. To do so, we manipulate each of the four
parameters and measure network layer performance, using Figure 4. Throughput of 4-element antennas and 49 nodes scenario
AODV in the network layer, in terms of throughput and delay
in multi-hop scenarios. We then compare the performance of
DRMAC with the performances of IEEE 802.11b (Direct
Sequence) and MMAC.
We will conduct simulations using DRMAC, IEEE 802.11,
and MMAC under different scenarios, for a total of 600
simulations. With a traffic generation rate of 10 to 100 packets
per second and a user traffic packet length of 1024 bytes, the
traffic generation rate of the entire network ranges from
0.08192 to 0.8192 Mbits per second, and the node density is 49
nodes per square mile with 4 antenna elements. To test the
effect of mobility, the speed (0 to 15 meters per second) and
the moving direction of each node is randomized, with nodes
exceeding the area bounced back. Each simulation scenario is
limited to 60 seconds to meet time and computer CPU memory
constraints.
Our results show that when the CC (the number of
contention cycles) is low, the DRMAC performs rather poorly Figure 5. Delay of 4-element antennas and 49 nodes scenario
 V. CONCLUSION Resolution, J. of Interconnection Networks, Vol. 3 No.3 & 4, September
and December 2002, pp. 167 -195.
In this paper, we propose a novel routing –aware MAC [17] J. Stine and G. de Veciana, A paradigm for quality of service in wireless
protocol employing directional antennas for wireless ad hoc ad hoc networks using synchronous signaling and node states, IEEE J.
networks. Our protocol can not only effectively alleviate the Selected Areas of Communications, Sep. 2004, pp. 1301-1321.
hidden and exposed terminal problems and node deafness, but [18] C.E. Perkins, E. M. Royer, and S. Das, "Ad hoc on demand distance
also fully employed the range enhancement of directional vector (AODV) routing",in IETF Internet draft, 2002, draft-ietf-
antennas. We evaluate the performance of ad hoc networks manetaodv-10.txt.
employing our protocol via extensive simulations. Our [19] D.B.Johnson,D.A.Maltz,Y.C.Hu, and J.G.Jetcheva,The dynamic source
routing protocol for mobile ad hoc network(DSR ).
preliminary simulations show that our protocol performs better
[20] C. E. Perkins and P. Bhagwat, “Highly dynamic Destination-Sequenced
than IEEE 802.11 and MMAC in ad hoc networks. The results Distance-Vector routing (DSDV) for mobile computers,” In
we obtained are promising, and the extent of this performance Proceedings of the SIGCOMM ’94 Conference on Communications
improvement is even larger in dense networks. Future works Architectures, Protocols and Applications, pp. 234-244, August 1994).
would include the comparison of DRMAC with other MAC [21] Amit Kumar Saha, Khoa Anh To, Santashil PalChaudhuri, Shu Du, and
and routing protocols. David B. Johnson, "Design and Performance of PRAN: A System for
Physical Implementation of Ad Hoc Network Routing Protocols", in
IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 6(4):463-479, April 2007.
REFERENCES [22] David B. Johnson, David A. Maltz, and Josh Broch, "DSR: The
[1] C. Kam and C. Schurgers, “TreeDMA: a hybrid MAC/routing solution Dynamic Source Routing Protocol for Multi-Hop Wireless Ad Hoc
for small-scale wireless networks,” to appear in Proceedings of the 3rd Networks", in Ad Hoc Networking, edited by Charles E. Perkins,
International Workshop on Information Fusion and Dissemination in Chapter 5, pp. 139-172, Addison-Wesley, 2001. Invited paper.
Wireless Sensor Networks (SensorFusion’09 Mobiquitous’09), July [23] H. Gharavi and B. Hu, "Directional Antenna for Multipath Ad Hoc
2009. Routing", The Proceedings of the IEEE CCNC- Personal Ad Hoc and
[2] IEEE 802.11 WG, Wireless Lan Medium Access Control (MAC) and Sensor Networks (CCNC'09), Las Vegas, January 2009, pp. 1-5
Physical-Layer (PHY) Specifications, 1999; standard. [24] B. Hu and H. Gharavi,, “DSR-Based Directional Routing Protocol for
[3] V. Bharghavan, A. Demers, S. Shenker, and L. Zhang, MACAW: A Ad Hoc Networks,” IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference,
Media Access Protocol for Wireless LAN’s, Proceedings of ACM 2007. GLOBECOM ’07, pp. 4936–4940, Washington DC, USA,
SIGCOMM’94, pp. 212-225, 1994. Nov. 2007.
[4] C.L. Fullmer, J.J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves, Floor Acquisition Multiple [25] H.Gharavi, “ Multi-Channel Mobile Ad-hoc Links for Multimedia
Access (FAMA) for Packet- Radio Networks, Proceedings of ACM Communications,” Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 96, No. 1, pp. 77–
SIGCOMM’95, pp. 262-273, 1995. 96, January 2008.
[5] P. Karn, MACA- A new channel access method for packet radio, in
ARRL/CRRL Amateur Radio 9th Computer Networking Conference,
pp. 134-140, 1990.
[6] R. Choudhury, X. Yang, R. Ramanathan, and N. Vaidya, Using
Directional Antennas for Medium Access Control in Ad Hoc Networks,
in ACM Mobicom, September 2002.
[7] R. Ramanathan, On the performance of Ad Hoc Networks with
Beamforming Antennas, in ACM MobiHoc, October 2001.
[8] Y.-B. Ko, V. Shankarkumar, and N. H. Vaidya, Medium Access
Control Protocols Using Directional Antennas in Ad Hoc Networks, in
IEEE INFOCOM 2000, Mar. 2000.
[9] A. Nasipuri, S. Ye, J. You, and R. E. Hiromoto, A MAC Protocol for
Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Using Directional Antennas, in Proc. of the
IEEE Wireless Comm. and Networking Conf. (WCNC) 2000,
(Chicago, IL, USA), Sept. 2000.
[10] M. Takai, J. Martin,A. Ren, R. Bagrodia Directional Virtual Carrier
Sensing for Directional Antennas in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks, ACM
MobiHoc, June 2002.
[11] T. Korakis, G. Jakllari, and L. Tassiulas. A MAC protocol for full
exploitation of directional antennas in ad hoc wireless networks. In
Proceedings of Mobihoc, 2003.
[12] R. R. Choudhury and N. H. Vaidya. Deafness: A MAC problem in ad
hoc networks when using directional antennas, Technical report,
Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Network
Protocols (ICNP), October 2004.
[13] Tomasz Imielinski and Julio C. Navas. GPS-Based Addressing and
Routing. Internet Request For Comments RFC 2009 , November 1996
[14] Karthikeyan Sundaresan and Raghupathy Sivakumar. A Unified MAC
Layer Framework for Ad-hoc Networks with Smart Antennas,
MobiHoc’04, May, 2004.
[15] V. Voipio and P. Vainikainen. Narrowbeam cylindrical antenna array
with sparse antenna spacing. In 48th IEEE Vehicular Technology
Conference, volume 1, pages 465, Ottawa, Ont., Canada, May 18-21,
1998.
[16] J. Stine, G. de Veciana, K. Grace, and R. Durst, Orchestrating spatial
reuse in wireless ad hoc networks using Synchronous Collision