[sim-wg] TOSSIM and the 2.1 Release

[Venkatesh S.]

As I am quitting my current place by next week, I am busy in winding up the work.  

I was going through the Son et.all paper, but couldn't find a way on how to use the information for my packet level simulation.  In the mean while I was going through the exiting implementation of Packet level simulation.  

Phil, can you summarize the equation that you had used to compute the PRR based on SNR.  

In Zuniga et.all paper, there is one equation which speaks of PRR based on the SNR - will this be a right equation for me to substitute?



--
Regards, 
Venkatesh S



-----Original Message-----
From: sim-wg-bounces at Millennium.Berkeley.EDU on behalf of Chad Metcalf
Sent: Thu 9/20/2007 10:26 PM
To: Philip Levis
Cc: Razvan Musaloiu-E.; simwg; Tal Rusak
Subject: Re: [sim-wg] TOSSIM and the 2.1 Release
 
Phil, do you have a more firm target for the 2.1 release? End of 2007?
So several months maybe 4, 5, or 6?

> Life is going to be very busy for me for the next few weeks (NSDI is
> approaching), but I might be able to take a look today. Having a
> serial forwarder would require either multithreading in Python or
> polling the SF, right? Or did you write it as C/C++?

It's written in C and is in large part just the C SF embedded in
TOSSIM. To avoid multithreading and make it available in C and Python
the user is required to call the processing loop.

   38  while(t->time() < 600 * t->ticksPerSecond()) {
   39    throttle.checkThrottle();
   40    sf.process();
   41    t->runNextEvent();
   42  }

   46 for i in range(0, 20):
   47   throttle.checkThrottle()
   48   sf.process()
   49   t.runNextEvent()

This was the simplest way I thought to handle it. The SF forwards all
serial traffic out, setting the source. All serial traffic in is
delivered to the specified destination (broadcast not implemented).
Ignore the calls to the throttle, thats the other half of the TOSSIM
Live extensions.

> It would be great to incorporate this into the main tree. My one
> major concern is radio simulation: if there's power information,
> people will latch onto it as an evaluation mechanism, which means
> that the radio simulation needs to be reasonable (or at least
> pessimistic).

I agree. Venkatesh can you pitch in some information as to how your
packet level simulation is going and where you think it will be in the
next couple of months?

> Tal and I have been working on this. At the very least, I am going to
> incorporate a log-shadowing model to add some short-term temporal
> variation to RSSI. Tal's been looking at how to model longer-term
> swings.

Great, so this is targeted to the 2.1 release?

-- 
Chad @ Home
_______________________________________________
Sim-wg mailing list
Sim-wg at Millennium.Berkeley.EDU
https://www.millennium.berkeley.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sim-wg

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.



-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.millennium.berkeley.edu/pipermail/sim-wg/attachments/20070925/90862af7/attachment.html