Hi,

That's great. Finally a paper which actually describes what is
implemented in tinyOS 2.1. At the first scan of the paper, it seems
that what is implemented is similar to Box-MAC2, but I will read it
more carefully and check the implementation again..

Thank you,

Alban


2009/9/9 Razvan Musaloiu-E. <[email protected]>:
> Hi!
>
> On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Alban Hessler wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> In the LPL stack, in the PowerCycleP file:
>>
>> I don't understand why it is needed to probe 400 times
>> (MAX_LPL_CCA_CHECKS) the signal strength to detect if there is
>> currently a transmission. The sender on the other side sends
>> continuously, there is just a bit of radio silence between two
>> duplicates.
>>
>> 400 times is like 50ms (according to another post), which is a lot.
>
> The check is actually much smaller, around 16.5ms on TelosB. Figure 7 and
> Table 1 from here shows this:
>        http://cs.jhu.edu/~razvanm/ipsn2008koala.pdf
>
>> Finally, if you put a node to sleep 100 ms, then it's actually with
>> the radio on for half of the time (!)
>>
>> Then, if I decrease this MAX_LPL_CCA_CHECKS to 80, then I get about
>> 50-60 percent packet losses. (LPL with receive sleep between 100ms and
>> 300ms). Whereas with the value set to 400, I have a residual 1 %
>> packet loss.
>>
>> Can somebody explain me the reason behind this 400 value? Why is it so
>> large? Why is for example 80 not enough?
>
> As far as I know the value of 400 for the number o checks was picked
> because, as you also noticed, it is giving better performance than a small
> one. :-) It would be nice to investigate more the behavior of the CCA pin
> when a stream of packets are received.
>
> A good paper that talks about the LPL from TinyOS is this one:
>        http://sing.stanford.edu/pubs/sing-08-00.pdf
>
> --
> Razvan ME
>
>> The nodes are close to each other and send at 0 dbm, so I don't expect the
>> CCA threshold to be an issue. The CC2420 spec says that the RSSI prob is
>> +-6db, but I expect the RSSI to be anyway 12db more than the CCA threshold.
>>
>> That question was already asked in the following post, but remained
>> unanswered:
>>
>>
>> http://mail.millennium.berkeley.edu/pipermail/tinyos-help/2009-February/038272.html
>>
>> Thanks for any help,
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Alban
>> _______________________________________________
>> Tinyos-help mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://www.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-help
>>
>

_______________________________________________
Tinyos-help mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tinyos-help

Reply via email to