2009 Second International Conference on Advances in Mesh Networks
Wireless Mesh Networking: A Key Solution for Emergency & Rural Applications Abdulrahman Yarali1, Babak Ahsant2, Saifur Rahman3 1
Murray State University, KY , 2Mobile Communication Company of Iran, 3 Virginia Tech., Blacksburg, VA 257 IET , Murray, KY, USA 1
[email protected] 2
[email protected] 3
[email protected] be highly reliable and robust and should be able to function in potentially adverse and hostile environments. Abstract--All communities whether they are rural or urban will have to respond to safety, disasters, and emergency The SAFECOM program of the US Department of situations. These situations place a special burden on Homeland Security recently issued a Statement of communication systems for having a fully operational system. Requirements (SoR) for public safety wireless Given the shortcomings of current Public Safety and Disaster communication [1]. The following list comprises the most Recovery, reliable wireless mobile communications that enable important functional requirements for public safety real-time information sharing, constant availability, and communication mentioned in the SoR report: interagency interoperability are imperative in emergency situation. Wireless Mesh Networks have been receiving a great Integration of voice and data communications among deal of attention as a broadband access alternative for a wide local, regional, and national organizations range of markets, including those in the metro, emergency, Support for Mobility public-safety, carrier-access, and residential sectors. This Standards-based design paper provides a background on technology requirements for Use of Commercial-off-the-shelf-based equipment emergency and public safety communications systems and where possible addresses some of the technical influences of wireless mesh Support for Unicast, multicast and broadcast networks. The article describes the capabilities and architecture of the Man-portable, Interoperable, Tactical communication Operations Center communication system which was funded Security (Privacy, Integrity, Access Control) by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security. It is a modern Immediate on-scene access to response guidelines and mobile communications infrastructure well suited for public status of local assets safety and disaster recovery applications. Ability to refine, update, and manage content from the field Keywords: wireless mobile communications, emergency Real-time information sharing for collaboration across communications, architecture, public services, disaster recovery. jurisdictions and agencies Scalability, Extensibility I. INTRODUCTION Access to inelegance and support The world has recently seen disasters of a magnitude not It is difficult to find more than a few communities in the seen in many decades, causing loss of hundreds of United States that have achieved more than one or two of thousands of lives, destruction of millions of homes and these technology-based attributes in actual practice, businesses and the complete destruction of critical especially at the on-scene incident command level. Only in infrastructures. When an emergency occurs, such as a major cities, such as New York or Los Angeles, is there chemical spill, hurricane, or other natural or man-made tangible evidence of deployment-ready, integrated, disaster, personnel are sent to the field to access the affordable, and multifaceted tools to support emergency situation, plan a response and execute and monitor that management and crisis response. More typically, you may response. Emergency planning and response/recovery see one or more of these information technologies available approaches to a disaster recovery vary from one incident to at a fixed Emergency Operations Center (EOC) in a major the next depending on the scale and the nature of each city or in very large, tractor-trailer or recreation vehicle disaster. Interoperability, coverage, and flexibility of first(RV) sized, expensive, road-bound command posts. responder communication systems are among the most National agencies and the military are typically best critical issues evident from such events. The current and equipped with mobile command posts [2], but small urban emerging broadband multimedia public safety applications and rural communities in the United States are unlikely to require a network solution capable of delivering high-speed, have any capabilities beyond the traditional law high-throughput, low latency and high resiliency enforcement, fire, rescue, and ambulance service call and throughout an entire access area, which may even be dispatch centers. comprised of multiple jurisdictions. Communication The communication systems that are available now for systems for crisis management and disaster recovery must PSDR services lack crucial functionalities. They suffer
978-0-7695-3667-5/09 $25.00 © 2009 IEEE DOI 10.1109/MESH.2009.33
143
from high vulnerability due to the fact that they rely on a fixed infrastructure and lack of self-organization capabilities, do not support multimedia applications asking for high quality communications and/or high bandwidth. The conventional solution for communication in disaster relief operations is largely based on Terrestrial Trunked Radio (TETRA), designed for speech and status messaging, reaching data rates between 2.4 and 7.2 kbps [3]. These data rate limits are insufficient to give firemen access to the construction details of a building or to transport video images. While these constraints are somewhat relaxed with the advent of TETRA-II, it remains a severe constraint that TETRA relies on a fixed network infrastructure of base stations, and is therefore susceptible to the type of big disasters. The government is spending billions of dollars on research and development in this area; some states have already implemented, or are in the process of implementation of the state-wide public safety communications networks. Some progress is made in the design of the conceptual view of the national public safety communications network [4]. This paper presents an overview of existing wireless technologies with their potentials for PSDR applications. We discuss the PSDR communications requirements and show that wireless mesh networking technology is a robust network for emergency and public safety scenarios. Next, the paper describes the capabilities and architecture of the MITOC, which was funded by the U.S. Department of Homeland Security for emergency management and crisis response.
service to a potentially large customer base (up to tens of miles from the base station) [6]. The main drawback of WMANs is their (current) lack of mobility support and the line of sight (LOS) requirement: if a customer does not have a clear LOS to the WMAN base station, it is unlikely that he can receive service. In communities with a high density of obstructions (high-rise buildings or trees) more than half of the customers cannot be served due to the LOS requirement. Furthermore, the base stations tend to be complex and expensive. Today wireless communications incorporates many different forms of networks, devices and forms. From analog and digital radio, wireless communications can now provide the user with seamless, integrated method for the high speed wireless transmission of voice, data, video and more. It is very challenging to design a system that accommodates all of the PDSR requirements. The communication infrastructure needs to be reliable and continuous, and it must work with existing responders’ organizations’ devices if necessary. New high speed-speed wireless networks are now available that can operate up to 1000 times faster than most wireless systems that are currently used in PSDR applications. The following systems are some of wireless technology solutions with potentials for public services and applications. A. Satellite Communications Systems Satellite communication has been proposed and studied to be used for high speed data transmission and video conferencing in disasters and public safety scenarios [7, 8]. With the advance of satellite communication equipment, satellite IP network services using very small aperture terminal (VSAT) have become popular in mainly rural areas to access the Internet. VSAT has been studied for providing interactive real-time data for example for applications such as telemedicine [9,10]. However, satellite network connection services by VSAT have some major problems such as asymmetrical transmission rates, weight of VSAT equipment, and there is at least one country where VSAT is not licensed to be used for PDSR [11], and there maybe more.
II. PUBLIC SAFETY AND DISASTER RECOVERY COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS Wireless communication is without a doubt a very desirable service as emphasized by the tremendous growth in both cellular and wireless local area networks (WLANs) primarily, the ones that are compliant with the IEEE 802.11 family of standards, popularly known as Wi-Fi. However, these two radically different technologies address only a narrow range of connectivity needs, and there are numerous other applications that can benefit from wireless connectivity. The current cellular networks and even the third generation (3G) of cellular such as Enhanced Data for GSM Evolution (EDGE) and Universal Mobile telecommunication systems (UMTS) offer wide area coverage, but the service is relatively expensive and offers low data rates compared to WLANs 802.11 a, b, and g [5]. On the other hand, the WLANs have rather limited coverage footprint and limited mobility. Furthermore, in order to increase the coverage areas of WLANs by addition of access points, a wired backbone connecting multiple access points is required. Wireless metropolitan area networks (WMANs) (e.g., the family of IEEE 802.16 standards), partially bridges this gap, offering high data rates with guaranteed quality of
B. WiMAX Beside applications of satellite communications in disasters, Ref. [12] and [13] have proposed and studied use of WiFi and Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access (WiMAX). WiMAX communication technology is currently gaining a lot of momentum in wireless industry and will compete with wireless LANs, 3G cellular services, and possibly wireline services like cable and DSL (Digital Subscriber Line). The ability of WiMAX to challenge or supplant these systems will depend on its relative performance and cost, which remain to be seen. It has been assumed that WiMAX can provide broadband wireless access (BWA) up to 50 km between fixed stations and 5–15 km for mobile stations. And it can provide high-
144
transmission rates of up to 70Mbps [14, 15]. There is a tradeoff between the distance and transmission rates [16]. WiMAX is now in its early stage of deployment and is not widely implemented. Most evaluations have been conducted on an experimental basis [17]. In most countries, WiMAX uses licensed spectrum in 2.5GHz band and/or 3.5GHz band. WiMAX infrastructures will be very similar to cellular phones’ infrastructures. Projects and deployments of WiMAX technologies have been slow in the United States, but countries such as Pakistan and Vietnam have adopted the technology and rolled it out to several of its major cities and rural communities [18].
most redundant connection points to a building or remote user, enabling alternate routes for data packets if one or more connection points are disabled.
C. WiFi IEEE802.11(a,b,g) or WiFi have short coverage range of up to some 200m and it can provide transmission rates of up to 54Mbps, but has advantages over satellite and WiMAX since using commercial off-the-shelf WiFi units, high-speed network almost equivalent to WiMAX can be established at lower costs. Also, WiFi units are available all over the world with the same unlicensed spectrum. Therefore, fire, hospitals, and search and rescue teams from overseas that usually come with limited communication capability can communicate to each other with a high-speed transmission capability [19-21]. A shortcoming of WiFi is the coverage. Most researches and implementation of this topology for high-speed data transmission have been conducted for less than 300m coverage [22, 23]. To solve this problem and enable WiFi to be used as a disaster long-range and high-speed wireless LAN system, a makeshift but high-speed wireless LAN networks have been developed by [24]. These networks would establish communication between devastated areas and local authorities. The networks are easy to be built and anyone can use without any radio-related licenses. The networks would also be practical for use in other countries with limited resources and manpower to establish temporary emergency communications [25]. The problem with this configuration is LOS requirement and restricted mobility.
1 2 Transit Link @ 5 GHz (802.11a) Access Link @ 2.4 GHz (802.11b/g) Reduces deployment and operations cost 1. Reduces backhaul facilities 2. Seamless mobility Auto configuring and recovery
Figure1. Wireless mesh network radio architecture [26]
A partial mesh network offers redundancies that are similar to a full mesh network; however, a partial mesh network has fewer redundant connection points, leaving some buildings and remote users more vulnerable to failure in the event of a disaster. There are three distinct generations of wireless mesh products today. In the first generation one radio provides both backhaul and client services. In the second generation, one radio relays packets over multiple hops while another provides client access services. The third generation mesh products are replacing previous generation products as more demanding applications like voice and video need to be relayed wirelessly over many hops of the mesh network [27]. Figure 2 and 3 show the comparison of simulation results for a single, dual and multi radio mesh per access point (AP) capacity. Multi-hop mesh networks have some key advantages over their single –hop counter parts. These key advantages include robustness, higher bandwidth, and spatial reuse [28]. Multi-hop mesh is more robust than single-hop networks because it is not dependent on the performance of one node for its operation. Another way to achieve robustness is by using multiple routes to deliver data. The gain factor by which the throughput of the WMN network can be improved with respect to the (single-radio) single-channel network was assessed by means of simulations with 100 nodes [29]. Figure 4 shows this gain factor as a function of the number of channels, for 2, 3 and 4 radios per node, where the channel assignment was performed at random. The decline of gain at a high number of channels in figure 4 is caused by the loss of connectivity as the probability of nodes lacking a common channel
D. WMN A mesh network is a local area network that employs one of two connection arrangements — full mesh or partial mesh. In the full mesh network, each computing device is connected directly to each of the others, supporting the LAN with multiple connectivity tunnels. In the partial mesh network, some devices are connected to all the others, while other devices are linked only to the devices with which they exchange the most data. Because the mesh network automatically derives the best access path for each device and adjusts on the fly for failed connection, it is especially suitable for municipal government services typically delivered in the field, such as public health and safety operations and disaster response. A full mesh network provides the highest probability of continuity of operations in a disaster situation. It offers the
145
increases with the number of channels.
10 8 Multi Ratio
6
Dual Radio, realistic
4
6
Per -AP Access Capacit
Per-AP Access Capacity (Mbps
12
5 Per-AP Capacity Wired at End
4 3 2 1
Single Radio, Realistic
0
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
0 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11 12
Number Of Mesh APs
Number of APs
Figure3. Per-AP Capacity in a Dual-Radio Wireless Mesh System
Figure2. Multi Radio Mesh per AP Capacity WMNs can be used in a number of ways and for different PSDR communication scenarios. They are a
25
promising alternative technology for PSDR communication systems, providing features such as broadband support, excellent resilience to failures, self-configuration capability, interoperability and low cost. In contrast to PDSR, WMNs can provide
Multi channel through put ga factor
20
wireless network coverage of large areas without relying on a wired backbone infrastructure or dedicated access points. WMNs technologies have been actively researched and developed as key solutions to improve the performance and services of wireless personal area net works (WPANs), incident area networks (IAN) which is a temporary network created for a specific incident, jurisdiction area network (JAN) which is the main communication network for first responders for all data and voice traffic that the IAN does not handle, the wireless local area networks (WLANs) , and WMANs for a variety of applications, such as voice, data and video. The mesh is the best way to achieve the resiliency and scalability demanded from mission-critical public networks. Figure 5 shows four types of communication networks for public safety and disaster recovery applications [29]. WMNs meet a large proportion of SoR of SAFECOM program of the US Department of Homeland Security. Any data and multimedia service (including voice) can easily be implemented by WMNs via the IP protocol. User mobility can also be readily supported. Most current WMNs are built on standards-based radio technology, but commercial implementations typically use proprietary protocols and mesh software. However, efforts are under way to define mesh standards, with the ultimate goal of inter-vendor interoperability [30]. WMNs also support a wide range of communication modes, including Unicast, multicast and broadcast.
15 2 radio 3 Radios 10
4 Radios
5
0 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 22 24 26 28 30
Number of channels
Figure4. Multichannel and gain factor for WMN
Figure5. General architecture of public safety communication networks
Table 1 show how well WMNs succeed in providing the SAFECOM requirements for emergency services communications systems [29]. Some major issues that pertain to WMN are capacity and interference. In Mesh architectures, capacity and interference are so closely linked. Issues that affect efficiency can be combated with the use of antennas [31]. Limited scalability and capacity, combined with the lack of QoS guarantees, are currently WMNs’ most
146
significant shortcomings. These are also the areas in which WMNs fall short of the requirements for public safety communication systems [1]. The bulk of industrial and academic research into WMNs is currently trying to address these problems. Functional Requirements
Compliance Level
Interoperability Voice and Data Support Mobility support Security
4 5 4 4
A design priority for MITOC is to keep components modular and interchangeable. Radios in production versions of MITOC, for example, are customized to suit the requirements of a user’s jurisdiction. The current MITOC prototype includes a Kenwood base station and handheld radios operating in the 50, 150, 450, and 800 MHz ranges that suit local jurisdictions. Other radio systems, primarily for data transmission, have been successfully trialed in MITOC including 900 MHz transceivers for relaying Internet access from a remote satellite dish to the MITOC operated in a distant structure. Such a radio can also be used to transmit LAN connectivity to remote users working at a distance from the primary MITOC wireless “bubble.” Radio interoperability is arguably the most recognized problem area in public safety communications and is a priority capability for MITOC. A number of commercial solutions exist to convert analog radio inputs to digital signals, organize the digital signals into IP packets, and route IP packets to analog audio output radios for transmission to all parties on a tactical channel. Several of these systems were considered for use in MITOC. Each has features or price/performance benefits that may make it more preferable for one jurisdiction versus another. The Telex-Vega IP-233 was selected for the MITOC prototype due to its flexibility and an ability to serve as an on-scene tactical dispatch system. While a variety of commercial systems are available and all promise turn-key operation, pre-deployment setup, field use, and onthe-fly reconfiguration, these systems are problematic and significant pre-crisis planning, training, and rehearsal is necessary to ensure their successful field use. MITOC has used a Cisco 2811 series router that provides multiple features including built-in network security with Virtual Private Networking and Cisco Call Manager Express VOIP telephony. Current lower cost versions can include Linksys or Adtran routers. Primary, long-range, non-line-of-sight (NLOS) communication is currently provided by a 1.3 meter self erecting, auto-locating satellite dish providing 2 Mb/s download and 512 Kb/s upload, mounted on the roof of the MITOC transport vehicle. A Hughes Broadband Global Area Network (BGAN) portable satellite terminal provides a back-up NLOS capability. Cellular mobile communication is supported by a Junxion broadband cellular appliance that combines two or more separate cellular carrier signals into a redundant data stream that can burst up to 4–6 M/bps.
Performance Requirements Robustness Scalability Quality of Service
A wireless LAN A Voice-over-IP (VoIP) telephone switch Panels for phone jacks, antenna patch panel, and power A variety of ancillary equipment such as laptops, wireless and wired VoIP phones, a portable weather station, office equipment and supplies, and a generator
5 3 2
Table 1: WMN compliance with public safety communications requirements, 5 being most compliant with requirements
III. MITOC FOR PSDR Recognizing all the above realities, a U.S. academic research consortium, in cooperation with national, regional, and local emergency management organizations, has developed and demonstrated robust, reliable, and affordable mobile communications infrastructures specifically designed to affordably support small towns and rural communities during emergencies. The principal goal of MITOC research has been the design, implementation, test, deployment, and evaluation of mobile, interoperable, and affordable voice, data, and video communication tools for on-scene incident commanders and first responders. A secondary goal of the project has been the development and evaluation of standardized tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) for the effective use of advanced information technology and communication systems to enhance the performance of incident commanders, support agencies, and responding personnel. Finally, since inception, a stated research goal was that eventual production versions of MITOC were to be highly effective, yet still affordable for small and rural communities and organizations. With a heavy emphasis on providing communications infrastructure, the overall goal is to provide an incident commander an integrated package of complimentary public-safety-oriented tools and capabilities. MITOC has been and remains an entirely commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) system housed within rugged transport cases. The evolving architecture of MITOC has generally included the following: Satellite communications terminals Radio base stations configured for a user’s jurisdiction (up to six initially) Internet Protocol (IP)-based radio interoperability system programmed to support the radio frequencies in a user’s jurisdiction and expected responding agencies An Internet router An Internet server
A. The MITOC Wireless "Bubble" A critical feature of MITOC is the ability to provide a
147
“bubble” of secure wireless Internet access. This wireless network provides authorized users access to all MITOC applications from wireless capable computers, laptops, or PDAs. This allows on-scene collaboration through instant messaging which contributes to reducing radio traffic. Early MITOC versions used a Cisco 2.4 GHz broadband wireless router for the wireless network. Current versions use the Rajant Breadcrumb® MESH wireless system for robust security, greater range, and more flexible coverage. This system uses small, rugged, battery-powered access points that can be distributed around an emergency scene. The initial operational concept and technology limited the use of the MITOC wireless bubble because personnel had to work within a few hundred meters of the MITOC electronic equipment suite. While this provided a very significant capability, in the event of hazardous situations like fires and chemical spills, it could not support responders working at the immediate location of the emergency. The concept of meshed wireless networking and the adoption of the Rajant Breadcrumb® have changed this situation dramatically. The ability for an incident commander at a command post and a responder working in the immediate presence of a hazard to share a network-enabled, common operational picture is a critical new capability. In addition to traditional voice communications, the new concept and technology allows video surveillance data, sensor data, text messaging, Internet access, and other operational information to be shared over a common wireless mesh network infrastructure.
hazmat team members will access instructions for neutralizing the spill on their PDAs and laptops without leaving the scene via the Internet access provided by the Breadcrumb WMN and MITOC. C. Production and Sales of Systems A total of twelve MITOC systems have been ordered and to date eight have been assembled and delivered. Initial MITOC orders came primarily from state and local from energy and utility companies that will use their MITOCs to support continuity and service recovery operations. Production MITOC units are currently assembled by research personnel at Murray State University. In addition to hardware configured to the specification of each customer, system documentation, training, and support is provided by the research team. While no commercial production facility has been established at this point, a commercial partner focused on sales and marketing has been established. It is expected that this commercial partner will eventually establish a production facility and take over training and support responsibilities. IV. CONCLUSION All of PSDR communications have strong reliance on terrestrial communication infrastructure such as traditional landline and cellular telephony, as well as infrastructurebased Land Mobile Radio (LMR). When disaster strikes, access to reliable communications is crucial to the efforts of disaster relief and recovery operations where quick response translates into lives saved, and minimizing adverse impacts on the local economy. During emergencies - local, state, and national – the importance of communications systems, including telecommunications, broadcast, cable, and satellite systems, becomes clear. Mobile mesh networking enables broadband wireless communications in the absence of existing infrastructure ideal for first response situations. It ensures the interoperability, scalability and reliable performance required in large-scale emergencies where tactical communications are better served by networking on the fly enabled by a mesh network solution. It is evident that there are challenges that wireless mesh must over come. The challenges are in large part unique to WMNs and considerable research has yet to be completed before WMNs can reach their full potential. However, the opportunities and accomplishments of the wireless communications industry far out weigh the challenges. MITOC provides a highly capable, field-tested, and affordable mobile operations center for an emergency incident commander. Our research has just begun to explore the challenges and potential benefits of extending the MITOC communications infrastructure from the incident command post to the actual scene of the emergency or hazard with wireless mesh networking. Preliminary results indicate that WMN is a technically suitable yet affordable approach with significant potential payoffs. The goal of our
B. Example Operational Scenario MITOC systems have deployed and supported numerous real-world missions such as security operations at the Kentucky Derby and a large-scale train derailment with a hazmat spill and fire with up to six Breadcrumbs emplaced to extend the MITOC wireless bubble. An example typical deployment of MITOC and the WMN would begin with the report of a train derailment and hazardous material spill. Members of our research team are called to respond and support the operation. For a toxic hazmat situation, the incident command post will be positioned upwind a mile or more from the event, with intervening terrain or buildings to shield the command post for possible fire or blast dangers. In the event that power and communications are disrupted or unavailable, MITOC provides the responders a full suite of worldwide voice and data communications at the command post. From the command post, hazmat team members in full protective garb will travel to the incident scene, periodically turning on and dropping off Breadcrumbs along their route. At the scene of the spill, the team members will communicate by voice and text message back to the command post via the deployed Breadcrumbs. Surveillance cameras and chemical sensors they deploy at the scene will provide critical data to the incident commander at the command post via the Breadcrumbs. After determining the nature of the spill,
148
[17] J. Crouse,M.D’alessandro, and F. Lengerich, “WiMAX and the future of wireless technology,” An IJIS Institute briefing paper, June 2007. [18] Neves, P.; Simoes, P.; Gomes, A.; Mario, L.; Sargento, S.; Fontes, F.; Monteiro, E.; Bohnert, T., “WiMAX fir emergency services: an empirical evaluation,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Next Generation Mobile Applications, Services and Technologies (NGMAST ’07), pp. 340–345, Cardiff, UK, September 2007. [19] Development of Long-Range and High-SpeedWireless LAN for the Transmission of Telemedicine fromDisaster Areas Masayuki Nakamura,1 Shoshin Kubota,1 Hideaki Takagi,1 Kiyoshi Einaga,2 Masashi Yokoyama,3 KatsutoMochizuki,4 Masaomi Takizawa,5 and Sumio Murase5 [20] C. Chan, J. Killeen, W. Griswold, and L. Lenert, “Information technology and emergency medical care during disasters,” Academic Emergency Medicine, vol. 11, no. 11, pp. 1229–1236, 2004. [21] J. Light and A. Bhuvaneshwari, “Mobile infrastructure for emergency medical services,” in Proceedings of the IASTED International Conference on Telehealth (TELEHEALTH ’05), pp. 23–28, Banff, AB, Canada, July 2005. [22] M. Arisoylu, R.Mishra, R. Rao, and L. A. Lenert, “802.11 wireless infrastructure to enhance medical response to disasters,” in Proceedings of the American Medical Informatics Association Symposium (AMIA ’05), pp. 1–5, Washington, DC, USA, October 2005. [23] N. J. McCurdy, W. G. Griswold, and L. A. Lenert, “Realityfly through: enhancing situational awareness for medical response to disasters using ubiquitous video,” in Proceedings of the American Medical Informatics Association Symposium (AMIA ’05), pp. 510–514, October 2005. [24] M. Nakamura, K. Shoshin, Y. Yuying, M. Yutaka, and T. Masaomi, “Telemedicine for mountain climbers with high quality video image transmission on Japan Alps,” in Proceedings of the 22nd Joint Conference on Medical Informatics (JCMI ’02), pp. 176–177, Kawasaki, Japan, November 2002. [25] M. Nakamura,M. Takizawa, S.Murase, et al., “Study on emergency medical support for mountain huts in Japan Alps over wireless LAN and CATV network,” in Proceedings of the 21st Joint Conference on Medical Informatics (JCMI ’01), pp. 621– 622, Kawasaki, Japan, November 2001. [26] White Paper “Wireless Mesh Networks Outdoor Wi-Fi Made Simple”, Nortel, 2007. [27] Yarali, A. (2008). “Wireless Mesh Networking Technology for Commercial and Industrial Customers”, IEEE 21st CCECE08, Niagara Fall, Canada, 47-62. [28] White Paper, “Capacity of Wireless Mesh Network”, BelAir. Internet Source: http://www.tropos.com/technology/. [29] Marius Portman and Asad Amir Pirzada, “wireless Mesh Networks for Public safety and Crisis Management Applications”, IEEE Computer Society, Januaray/Februray 2008. [30] R. B. Dilmaghani, R. R. Rao, “Hybrid Wireless Mesh network with Application to Emergency Scenarios”, Journal of Software, Vol.3, NO.2, February 2008, Academy Publisher. [31] R. B. Dilmaghani, B. S. Manoj, and R. R. Rao, “Emergency communication challenges and privacy,” in Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Information Systems for Crisis Response and Management (ISCRAM ’06), pp. 1–9, Newark, NJ, USA, May 2006.
continuing research is not to prove the feasibility of existing WMN approaches or to invent new ones. The focus and primary contribution of our research will be to identify, document, and share the innovative approaches to emergency management and crisis response that the first responders develop as a result of using this advanced information technology during their training and real-world operations. Acknowledgment Thanks to Michael Bowman for MITOC contribution. REFERENCES [1]
[2] [3]
[4] [5] [6] [7]
[8]
[9] [10] [11] [12]
[13]
[14]
[15] [16]
SAFECOM Program, “Statement of Requirements for Public Safety Wireless Communication and Interoperability,” US Dept. of Homeland Security; www.safe comprogram.gov/SAFECOM/library/technology. Gourley, S. ‘Golden Guardian 2006’ U.S. Army North Prepares for Disaster Response, Army, AUSA, Arlington, February 2007, 34-40. M. de Graaf, H. van den Berg, R. J. Boucherie, F. brouwer, I. de Bruin, H Elfrink, I. Fernandez-Diaz, S. Heemstra de Groot, R. De Haan, S. Nunez, J. Van Ommeren, F. Roijers, J. Stemerdink, E. Tromp, “ Easy Wireless: Broadband ad-hoc networking for emergency services”, The Sixth Annual Mediterranean Ad Hoc networking Workshop, Corfu, Greece, June 12-15, 2007. White Paper, “Public safety Interoperability: Wireless Mesh Delicvers”, BelAir networks, 2007 Yarali, “802.11n: The new wave in WLAN Technology”, The International Symposium on Computer Human Interaction in Mobile Technology, Singapore, 318-324, 2007. Yarali, “WiMAX: A Key to Bridging the Digital Divide”, IEEE Southeast 07, Richmond, VA. V. Garshnek and F. M. Burkle, “Applications of telemedicine and telecommunications to disaster medicine: historical and future perspectives,” Journal of the AmericanMedical Informatics Association, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 26–37, 1999. T. Miyashita, M. Takizawa, K. Nakai, et al., “Telemedicine of the heart—real-time telescreening of echocardiography using satellite telecommunication,” Circulation Journal, vol. 67, no. 6, pp. 562– 564, 2003. M. Cermack, “Monitoring and telemedicine support in remote environments and in human space flight,” British Journal of Anaesthesia, vol. 97, no. 1, pp. 107–114, 2006. Yoshida, T. Date, H. Sasaki, et al., “Telemedicine for rural area and islands using satellite internet access,” Japanese Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 162–163, 2006. G. R. Kanthraj and C. R. Srinivas, “Store and forward teledermatology,” Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprology, vol. 73, no. 1, pp. 5–12, 2007. M. A. Sadiq, K. Usman, H. Juzoji, K. Igarashi, K. Tanaka, and I. Nakajima, “Wireless IP network for emergency disaster telemedicine: case study of Yogyakarta-central java earthquake,” Japanese Journal of Telemedicine and Telecare, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 128–129, 2006. C. S. Pattichis, E. Kyriacou, M. S. Pattichis, A. Panayides, nd A. Pitsillides, “A review of m-health e-emergency systems,” in Proceedings of the International Special Topic Conference on Information Technology in Biomedicine (ITAB ’06), Ioannina, Greece, October 2006. M Donahoo and B Steckler, “Emergency wireless networks,” in Proceedings of IEEE Military Communications Conference (MILCOM ’05), vol. 4, pp. 2413–2420, Atlatnic City, NJ, USA, October 2005. H. Cordova, P. Boets, and L. Van Biesen, “Analysis and applications of WiMAX standard: forecasting the trends”. Yarali, A., Rahman S. & Bwanga M. (2008). WiMAX: The Innovative Wireless Access Technology, Journal of Communication (JCM), Academy Publisher, 3, (2), 53-63.
149
