NASA/TM—2001-210975 AIAA–2001–289

Advanced Communication and Networking

Technologies for Mars Exploration
Kul Bhasin and Jeff Hayden
Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

Jonathan R. Agre, Loren P. Clare, and Tsun-Yee Yan

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calfornia

September 2001
 The NASA STI Program Office . . . in Profile

Since its founding, NASA has been dedicated to • CONFERENCE PUBLICATION. Collected
the advancement of aeronautics and space papers from scientific and technical
science. The NASA Scientific and Technical conferences, symposia, seminars, or other
Information (STI) Program Office plays a key part meetings sponsored or cosponsored by
in helping NASA maintain this important role. NASA.

The NASA STI Program Office is operated by • SPECIAL PUBLICATION. Scientific,

Langley Research Center, the Lead Center for technical, or historical information from
NASA’s scientific and technical information. The NASA programs, projects, and missions,
NASA STI Program Office provides access to the often concerned with subjects having
NASA STI Database, the largest collection of substantial public interest.
aeronautical and space science STI in the world.
The Program Office is also NASA’s institutional • TECHNICAL TRANSLATION. English-
mechanism for disseminating the results of its language translations of foreign scientific
research and development activities. These results and technical material pertinent to NASA’s
are published by NASA in the NASA STI Report mission.
Series, which includes the following report types:
Specialized services that complement the STI
• TECHNICAL PUBLICATION. Reports of Program Office’s diverse offerings include
completed research or a major significant creating custom thesauri, building customized
phase of research that present the results of data bases, organizing and publishing research
NASA programs and include extensive data results . . . even providing videos.
or theoretical analysis. Includes compilations
of significant scientific and technical data and For more information about the NASA STI
information deemed to be of continuing Program Office, see the following:
reference value. NASA’s counterpart of peer-
reviewed formal professional papers but • Access the NASA STI Program Home Page
has less stringent limitations on manuscript at http://www.sti.nasa.gov
length and extent of graphic presentations.
• E-mail your question via the Internet to
• TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM. Scientific [email protected]
and technical findings that are preliminary or
of specialized interest, e.g., quick release • Fax your question to the NASA Access
reports, working papers, and bibliographies Help Desk at 301–621–0134
that contain minimal annotation. Does not
contain extensive analysis. • Telephone the NASA Access Help Desk at
301–621–0390
• CONTRACTOR REPORT. Scientific and
technical findings by NASA-sponsored • Write to:
contractors and grantees. NASA Access Help Desk
NASA Center for AeroSpace Information
7121 Standard Drive
Hanover, MD 21076
NASA/TM—2001-210975 AIAA–2001–289

Advanced Communication and Networking

Technologies for Mars Exploration
Kul Bhasin and Jeff Hayden
Glenn Research Center, Cleveland, Ohio

Jonathan R. Agre, Loren P. Clare, and Tsun-Yee Yan

Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Pasadena, Calfornia

Prepared for the

19th International Communications Satellite Systems Conference and Exhibit
sponsored by the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics
Toulouse, France, April 17–20, 2001

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Glenn Research Center

September 2001
 This report contains preliminary
findings, subject to revision as
analysis proceeds.

Available from
NASA Center for Aerospace Information National Technical Information Service
7121 Standard Drive 5285 Port Royal Road
Hanover, MD 21076 Springfield, VA 22100

Available electronically at http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/GLTRS

 Advanced Communication and Networking Technologies for
Mars Exploration
Kul Bhasin and Jeff Hayden
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Glenn Research Center
Cleveland, Ohio 44135

Jonathan R. Agre, Loren P. Clare, and Tsun-Yee Yan

Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Pasadena, California 91109

Abstract–Next-generation Mars communications networks will provide communications and

navigation services to a wide variety of Mars science vehicles including: spacecraft that are arriving
at Mars, spacecraft that are entering and descending in the Mars atmosphere, scientific orbiter
spacecraft, spacecraft that return Mars samples to Earth, landers, rovers, aerobots, airplanes, and
sensing pods. In the current architecture plans, the communication services will be provided using
capabilities deployed on the science vehicles as well as dedicated communication satellites that will
together make up the Mars network. This network will evolve as additional vehicles arrive, depart or
end their useful missions. Cost savings and increased reliability will result from the ability to share
communication services between missions.

This paper discusses the basic architecture that is needed to support the Mars Communications
Network part of NASA's Space Science Enterprise (SSE) communications architecture. The network
may use various networking technologies such as those employed in the terrestrial Internet, as well
as special purpose deep-space protocols to move data and commands autonomously between vehicles
at disparate Mars vicinity sites (on the surface or in near-Mars space) and between Mars vehicles
and earthbound users. The architecture of the spacecraft on-board local communications is being
reconsidered in light of these new networking requirements. The trend towards increasingly
autonomous operation of the spacecraft is aimed at reducing the dependence on resource scheduling
provided by Earth-based operators and increasing system fault tolerance. However, these benefits
will result in increased communication and software development requirements. As a result, the
envisioned Mars communications infrastructure requires both hardware and protocol technology
advancements. This paper will describe a number of the critical technology needs and some of the
ongoing research activities.

1. Introduction
Future Mars exploration will be supported by a multiplicity of in situ intercommunicating entities
that require the ability to share information among themselves and with the Earth users. There will
be multiple active missions, producing ever-increasing amounts of scientific data and many of these
missions will also need a significant amount of local communication (e.g., teams of rovers). The
aggregate data produced by these missions will be multiplexed through a backbone network to the
Earth that will eventually support data rates in the Gigabit per second range. This is a substantial
increase over the current capabilities. , The current Mars Global Surveyor mission is representative of
the state-of-the-practice in Mars-to-Earth telecommunications and utilizes direct links to Earth based
on X-band microwave communication link technologies at data rates up to approximately 85 kilobits
per second. Clearly, new technologies will need to be brought to bear to achieve this increased
capacity and to support the new in situ networking. The Mars communication architecture will be
designed to evolve in such a way as to meet anticipated near term (2001-2010), mid-term (2010-
2020), and far-term (beyond 2020) requirements. The architecture itself will be defined in terms of
several types of communication subnetworks, called architectural elements1, and specific technology

1
In [1], a different architectural decomposition was defined. However, in the interest of having a
common set of terms with the Mars communication activities, we use the nomenclature of the Mars
program for this paper.

NASA/TM—2001-210975 1
developments are described in the context of these elements. These architectural elements for the
Mars network are defined below:
A. Mars-Earth backbone network – This architectural element provides the long haul data links
directly between Mars vehicles and the Earth as well as the Earth-based infrastructure elements.
The remote assets include elements with long-haul capabilities (certain Mars surface vehicles,
spacecraft in Mars orbit) and the in-space data relay network. The Earth-ground segments include
the deep space network (DSN), NASA and other space agency Intranets and virtual private
networks (VPN’s), and the Internet. The critical technologies involve increasing the capacity
and the autonomous operation of the remote long haul space link assets.

B. Mars vehicle proximity networks – These involve the wireless links with distances that are
relatively near to the planet. There are three types of proximity links.

1. Orbiter to/from Surface (called access network in [1]): This architectural element provides
the data links between Mars surface/airborne vehicles and spacecraft in Mars orbit. The
orbiters will typically contain the long haul links to Earth and will host a gateway to the
backbone network to relay between the backbone elements and the mission spacecraft and/or
vehicles, or will forward to another proximity vehicle.
2. Mars inter-spacecraft networks - This architectural element provides the data link between
spacecraft flying in formation, clusters, or constellations in the Mars vicinity. It also includes
the communication interfaces between approaching/departing spacecraft. In particular,
spacecraft in a communication constellation that intercommunicate to relay the data to Earth
are included.
3. Mars surface networks (called proximity network in [1]): This architectural element provides
the data links between surface vehicles (rovers, airplanes, aerobots, landers, and sensors)
spread out in an ad hoc network.

C. Local area networks (LAN’s) on-board the Mars vehicles (included in the access network [1]):
This architectural element interconnects the various modules of the vehicle through an internal
LAN consisting of one or more types of serial or parallel interconnected busses.

The choice of protocol suites for use in the Mars Network is critical as this is the first true deep
space-based “network” [2]. Standardization of the protocol interfaces facilitates the use of familiar
terrestrial software constructs that provide transparency and hide the details of the communication
architecture. There is a powerful incentive to provide transparency as this reduces software
development costs and increases software reliability. Where possible, Internet protocol (IP)-
compliant services can be used to enable the use of powerful Internet-like applications (ftp, e-mail),
application program interfaces (sockets), and languages (Java, Java Script, HTML, XML, etc.) that
simplify the task of coding operations that move data and command and coordinate activities between
Mars vehicles. However, due to differences between terrestrial environments and those at planetary
distances, several important services that are unique to the deep space-based environment are desired.
Examples of these services include accommodation of long propagation delay times, handling
periodic link outages efficiently, providing intermediate-node data custody, best-effort delivery of
data with portions missing and noted, and non-blocking function operation. Applications built on top
of these services may need to be explicitly modified from their terrestrial counterparts. The benefits
derivable from maintaining an open communications architecture (such as the Internet) will help to
achieve the long lifetime of the Mars networks and the need to accommodate missions planned
over the next 10 to 30 years. In the long term, these issues are being examined in the context of the
Interplanetary Internet (IPN) where the Mars network represents a subnetwork within the larger space
network [3].

Protocol layering can be used to support this transparency while providing the ability to include
customized services within a well-defined reference model. There are two basic design questions that
must be considered. These are 1) what services and interfaces are presented to the application layer
software developers, and 2) what protocols are used to implement the services at each layer. As an

NASA/TM—2001-210975 2
example of the former, an application programmer interface (API) that is identical to sockets may be
provided, but the underlying protocols may be specially tailored to the space links. As an example of
the latter, with proper layering, one could easily replace a standard IP routing protocol (e.g., Bellman-
Ford) with a non-internet routing protocol (such as an ad hoc routing scheme), with no application
layer changes. The choice to use a non-standard protocol at a given layer may be warranted by
specific aspects of the environment such as power efficiency, or to provide a service that is not
available in any existing protocol. In recognition of the fact that there is not a unique protocol suite
that provides the best solution for each architectural element, there is a need to define the interfaces
between the selected protocols and to develop gateways that will perform translations while
maintaining transparency.

A heterogeneous collection of spacecraft is anticipated to be deployed and their internal architectures

can range from fully distributed to fully integrated to accommodate the specific requirements of the
vehicle’s mission. Many Mars vehicles will implement on-board, Local Area Networks (LAN's) to
route data and commands between subsystems and science instruments. Standards are emerging that
define common interfaces for the on-board communication needs. Integration with the general Mars
communication architecture through common protocols that provide standard naming and addressing
schemes will permit simplified access to resources (e.g., instruments) by users and other vehicles.

The Mars network will eventually provide both scheduled and on-demand service to users and
vehicles. The eventual operational concept for the Mars network is that it will enable the user to
control his/her vehicle (or instrument) or the vehicle to move its data to Earth without explicit
scheduling by ground personnel, thereby reducing overall mission operations costs. The Earth-side
support of the Mars network is basically the maintenance of the Earth-Mars backbone link and its
connection to the Earth-side space agency intranets and ultimately the Internet. Eventually the data
that traverses the backbone will be self-routing, wherein the destination addresses in the data packets
find the end-point user or space vehicle applications. The mission operations group need not concern
itself with packet routing.

As the interest in Mars exploration grows and new vehicles are deployed with more and better
communications assets, the architecture will acquire greater capabilities. In sections 2-4, we describe
the potential near-term (out to 2010), mid-term (out to 2020) and far-term (beyond 2020) scenarios for
the Mars network. Then in section 5 we discuss new technologies that address the requirements that
we foresee in terms of the architectural elements.

2. Mars Near-Term Communication Architecture

The near-term architecture for the Mars communication infrastructure is illustrated in Figure 1. This
architecture provides moderately high-speed communication between Earth and Mars vehicles via the
radio frequency (X-, Ka-band) equipment incorporated on each scientific orbiter sent to Mars as well
as on-board the large rovers. Each of these orbiting vehicles incorporates a moderately high data rate
RF backbone link to the Earth-based DSN as well as a moderate data rate proximity link to other
Mars surface vehicles. Many of the orbiters will also provide navigation information to the surface
elements. In addition, the
infrastructure will be Science Orbiters with
augmented by a dedicated Comm. Capability
Backbone Network
communications satellite Proximity Networks
(ASI Telesat) to be put in Mars
place to perform data
relay functions for surface
vehicles, such as the Robotic Lander/
Telesat
Scout-class that do not Direct to Earth
Sensor Network
have the ability to
communicate directly
to Earth. As shown
in the figure, low rate Figure 1. Mars Near-Term Communication Architecture

NASA/TM—2001-210975 3
proximity networks will be employed between Mars vehicles, such as between landers and rovers as
necessary. Missions using intercommunicating sensor pods are possible, but not yet planned.

3. Mars Mid-Term Communication Architecture

The mid-term architecture for the Mars communication infrastructure is illustrated in Figure 2 and
includes the Robotic Outpost, representing the first permanent presence on Mars. Sensor networks
will be used to monitor the local environment around the outpost. This architecture provides high-
speed communication between Earth and Mars vehicles via a micro-satellite constellation designed
specifically for Mars communications and navigation purposes [4]. Each of these spacecraft
incorporates a high data
rate Ka-band package for MarSat
Backbone Network
the backbone connection Proximity Networks
Robotic Outpost

to the Earth-based DSN

Communication
as well as high data rate Local Area Networks
MicroSats at 4,000 km
access links to Mars Mars
Relay at Earth
vehicles. One or more Orbit
Mars communications
satellites (MarSat) Formation Flyers

will be placed in
Areosynchronous Mars
Orbit (AMO) and used
to provide continuous
coverage for the
Microsats and ground Figure 2. Mars Mid-Term Communication Architecture
vehicles in view. It will support the high-rate communications to/from Earth. This MarSat would
become an always available, high-speed link for the Robotic Outpost below it. In addition, there is
likely to be one or more Earth orbiting relay stations that operates using high-speed RF or optical
means to provide additional DSN capacity and availability.

4. Mars Far-Term Communication Architecture

The far-term architecture for the Mars communication infrastructure will be used in support of Human
Exploration and Development of Space (HEDS) missions and is illustrated in Figure 3. This
architecture provides high availability, high-speed communication between Earth and the Mars Base
and other Mars vehicles. The traffic patterns will drastically shift from the predominantly data-to-
earth requirement to a high volume of two-way traffic, consisting of a wide variety of types (e.g.,
voice, video, data) to/from Earth to support the human presence. There will also be an increased need
for local communications
to handle the human
MarSat
generated local traffic. Backbone Network
At this point in time, Proximity Networks HEDS Outpost
the Mars network will
become the most MicroSats

important hub of the Optical Relay at Mars

Earth Orbit
Interplanetary Internet
and handle data from
other deep space Formation
Flyers
missions. In order to
support communications
at all times, relay stations
Relay at Lagrangian Point
placed at gravitationally
stable Lagrangian points
associated with the sun Figure 3. Mars Far-Term Communication Architecture
and the Earth may be

NASA/TM—2001-210975 4
employed to avoid blackouts during the periods that the sun is between Earth and Mars. These relay
stations will also be backbone elements of the intra-solar system IPN communications network. Each
of these relay stations may incorporate high data rate microwave and optical packages for the intra-
backbone communications links. Multiple Mars communications satellites (MarSat) in
Areosynchronous Mars Orbit (AMO) will be used to handle the high data rate communications link
from other communication assets and ground vehicles to Earth either directly or via the relay network.
They will be the primary high availability, high-speed relay links for the manned Mars stations and
expeditions below.

5. Description of technologies by architectural element

Below we describe key communication and networking technologies for the backbone, proximity, and
spacecraft bus architectural elements.

Technologies for backbone networks

Technologies for the Mars backbone networks need to focus on delivering higher data rates at very
long distances and also address the transport layer protocols issues for such distances. The use of Ka
band technologies will allow increase in data rates currently achievable at X-band frequencies. In the
long term various methods of employing optical communications will be the next step to increase the
data rates.

At the physical layer, the backbone technologies that are under development address increasing the
data communications rate on several fronts. For use in the near term, the technologies will increase
the radiated power output of Ka-band transmitters, improve the sensitivity of receivers, and handle
higher rate digital bit-streams. These technologies include: 1) high efficiency Ka-band 30W and
100W traveling wave tube amplifiers (TWTA's), 2) ultra low noise cooled receivers, 3) high-
efficiency Ka-Band MHEMT MMIC solid state amplifiers, 4) high rate modem circuits, 5) efficient
optical power sources, and 6) micro-radian acquisition and tracking technologies.

The current state-of-the-art for 32 GHz TWTA’s is the 20 W amplifier on the Cassini spacecraft. Its
efficiency of ~ 40% represented a doubling of what had been achieved up to that time. Developing
space-qualified amplifiers producing greater than 200 W of RF power will require the use of a
different type of circuit than used in the lower power amplifiers. Previously the development of a
dramatically different amplifier would require several iterations before producing an amplifier that
met the desired performance. However, recently the number of required iterations has been drastically
reduced due to greatly improved computer modeling capability. New development in high quality
heterostructural materials will allow production of hi-efficiency Ka-Band MHEMT MMICs
amplifiers with 0.1 micron device structure to operate at more than 50% efficiency.

Critical optical technologies, such as the laser telescope in Figure 4,

are also being developed that promise large gains in signal to noise
ratios.

Simulation and optimization of the

TWT designs, Figure 5, are being
pursued to increase power,
Figure 4. Laser efficiency, reliability, and data
Communication Telescope Figure 5. TWT schematic
transmission rate for TWT amplifiers
while reducing design time and cost.

The physical layer backbone technologies that are intended for deployment in the far term will
increase the data rates even further. These technologies are: 1) optical links targeted for multi-Mbps
rates, 2) 200W TWTA's, and 3) large, lightweight antenna structures.

NASA/TM—2001-210975 5
The backbone data links will continue to require special techniques to operate at Earth-Mars distances
with low SNR. Work is continuing, for near term implementation, on coding (Turbo codes) to
increase the total amount of data passed during a transmission. These codes are used to recover data
that would otherwise be lost due to noise and dropouts.

The link and network layer activities will focus on providing efficient error control through variants
of Automatic Repeat Request (ARQ) tailored for the deep space links. In-space network store-and-
forward technologies that enable data routing by address (not by command) must provide the
translation between the protocols used on the long haul backbone link and the final proximity link.
Definition of a standard network layer interface will facilitate integration of the long haul, local and
on-board LAN would represent a significant achievement. In addition, a network management
protocol tailored for deep space, but similar to the Internet’s Simple Network Management Protocol
(SNMP) will be required to configure and operate the backbone.

The backbone network will most likely support a variety of protocols for the higher layers. The
transport and application layers may utilize variants of Internet-based protocols (e.g., TCP, UDP,
FTP), near-Earth space protocols (e.g., SCPS-TP) or deep-space protocols such as the CCSDS File
Delivery Protocol (CFDP) [5]. The trend is to use the protocols to enable data to be passed as a
semantically meaningful package (such as a record in a file versus just a bit stream) to and between
intermediate spacecraft en route to a science vehicle at the Mars end (in forward direction) or to Earth
(in the return direction). In CFDP, the intermediate points provide a “custody” service, and assume
responsibility for package delivery, removing the need for end-to-end acknowledgments over the
links with long propagation delay. A second important feature of CFDP is to allow the delivery of
partially complete packages, with the rationale that some precious data is better then none, as long as
one is informed of the missing parts.

The application level services that may be implemented on top of the backbone in the far term will
be directed toward creating an environment that can leverage from the state-of-the practice software
engineering for terrestrial applications. Bringing Internet capabilities to the space backbone such as
network servers to provide temporary storage, network switching, firewall protection, multicast
services, email services, software control (XML, Java, Java Script, etc.) will be necessary for the
implementation of autonomy in the operation of the network. Network access on-demand by user or
vehicle will be important feature that will reduce the cost of network control and mission operations.

Technologies for proximity networks

Orbiter to/from Surface Interfaces– Mars surface vehicles may employ multiple RF subsystems.
In the near term a proximity system that listens and radiates omni-directionally would be used for
communication with relatively fast moving objects, such as a low altitude orbiter, for return of science
data, video, or high-resolution images or for receiving lengthy software changes from Earth. This
subsystem, perhaps UHF, may also be used for surface-to-surface proximity communications wherein
a vehicle could coordinate its science data gathering with other nearby vehicle(s); and it could locate
the other vehicle(s) using direction and ranging capabilities built into that system. A lower rate,
directional antenna system would be employed as a backup link to Earth for transmitting and
receiving short command strings and for sending back status telemetry and minimal science data.
It would also be used in emergencies wherein the vehicle may send SOS messages to the Mars
network or the Earth may attempt to regain command control of a malfunctioning vehicle. In later
time frames, electronically steerable antennas may become feasible for both local and longer distance
links.

The physical layer technologies needed for the proximity network elements that are used for commu-
nications between an orbiter and a surface vehicle are the small volume, mass, and power RF
receivers and transmitters that utilize the UHF, X-band, and Ka-band frequency regimes. Antenna
development includes agile phased arrays, small steerable dishes, and omni-directional antennas.
Also at the physical layer, the RF to digital interface developments include novel modem designs.

NASA/TM—2001-210975 6
The use of focused antennas, Ka-band (20GHz-30GHz) receivers and transmitters is encouraged for
vehicles that have moderate to large data files to transfer (100kB to multi-MB).

SiGe Radio Frequency Solid State Power Amplifiers

(see Figure 6) are being developed at 8.4 GHz for
orbiter to surface links. These amplifiers can be
easily integrated with digital devices and circuit on Si
substrate to reduce size of communication subsystem.

Figure 6.SiGe Solid State Power

Amplifier
The Micro
Communications and Avionics System (MCAS – Figure 7)
for Mars orbit link has been developed. This is a
multimission transceiver for low power and low mass
Figure 7. MCAS Testbed missions. The transceiver has the following characteristics:
Mass < 150g, Volume < 100 cm3, Coherent BPSK
(Manchester/NRZ, Supp/Resid), Convolutional coding (K=7, R=1/2), 0.5W Output power, and NF <
3dB, stability 10-6. The next generation highly miniaturized system is under development.

The CCSDS Proximity-1 link layer protocol is presently being designed specifically for deep space
surface-orbiter links [6] that are characterized by relatively short propagation times and relatively
high SNR. Proximity-1 will be used in the near- and mid-term as the Mars protocol for the short-link
portion of the surface-orbiter-Earth links. Proximity-1 allows the orbiter to access multiple,
heterogeneous surface assets through a common hailing procedure. Once a session has been
established between the orbiter and the surface element, the link can be moved to a set of working
channels. Various types of communication services are accommodated such as the use of fixed block
size or variable length messaging. The protocol provides a reliable message delivery service and a
“best-effort” service. Some procedures are in place for handling contention from multiple orbiters;
however, coordination methods are still being defined.

At the network layer, the data is either handed over to the backbone network where a simple relay
function is required to accomplish the hop to Earth, or if the data is destined for another surface
vehicle, it is handled by the proximity network layer. The technologies needed at the transport and
application layers are similar to those discussed for the backbone network above, with shorter delays
and greater need for energy and storage efficiency.
Mars Inter-spacecraft Networks – Most of the inter-spacecraft proximity networks will be
implemented in multiple spacecraft systems that operate in a cooperative fashion, such as in
constellations, formations, or clusters. These multiple spacecraft systems can be considered a single
mission entity that might accomplish its scientific or infrastructure task by passing data between each
other. Reasons for this inter-spacecraft communication may include coordination of relative alignment
and positioning, distribution of computing tasks, master-slave or peer-to-peer cooperation, event
timing and measurement triggering, and data passing in support of implementing a general
communications network.

The physical layer technologies needed for the inter-spacecraft network elements are small volume,
mass, and power RF receivers and transmitters that utilize the UHF, S-band, X-band, and Ka-band
frequency regimes. Antenna development includes agile phased arrays and omni directional antennas.
Optical communications devices will eventually take part in inter-spacecraft networks. Also at
the physical layer, further RF/optical to digital interfaces and modem advances are needed.
Another function of these communication physical layers will be the ability to measuring relative
distances and attitudes between the spacecraft. The precision of these measurements will be

NASA/TM—2001-210975 7
dependent on the mission of the cooperative spacecraft. Coarse measurement will be satisfied by
various RF system capabilities in range measurement. Fine measurement will be accomplished with
the optical systems.

At the inter-spacecraft network's data link and network layers a peer-to-peer communication scheme
is most appropriate. Modifications of Proximity-1 or emerging wireless LAN technologies (e.g.,
IEEE 802.11 [7] or Bluetooth [8]) are under consideration. These wireless LAN's will need
asynchronous and real-time capabilities and will need to handle ad hoc joining and leaving for star-
centered formations or more general multi-hop topologies. Also, motion dominated by predictable
orbital mechanics may be incorporated in the link topology driven network adaptations.

The transport and application layers for the inter-spacecraft networks will use technologies similar to
those used in the terrestrial Internet and for real-time applications on Earth. Additional development
will be needed to implement network services to provide time synchronization and distributed
computing coordination. In general, the autonomous coordination of the multi-spacecraft set will be
accomplished at and above the inter-spacecraft network application layer, as in an agent-based
architecture.

Mars surface networks– The Mars surface proximity networks are those wireless networks that are
used to intercommunicate between the various entities in the Mars atmosphere or on the Mars surface.
These proximity links are of somewhat lower data rate (multi-kilobits per second) than inter-
spacecraft links (multi-megabits per second) and use different technologies. These networks are used
to coordinate actions between Mars landers, rovers, aerobots, airplanes, etc. The surface proximity
networks are also used to relay data from weak emitters to nearby, more capable data gatherers (such
as intelligent landers or rovers) that can pass the data up the communications chain to Earth via their
access network system.
Some example applications include:
1. Sensor webs for in-situ science – Small, low-cost, low-power nodes that provide sensors,
multihop communications and on-board data processing using limited power supplies. These may
be formed into arrays of randomly placed sensors that will self-organize to perform their sensing
and communication functions. On-board processing is used to reduce the raw data by triggering
on observed phenomena, performing local analysis and by combining results with neighboring
sensors. These types of systems offer the unique ability to perform simultaneous multipoint
measurement of a common phenomenon in order to a) derive a combined signal with higher SNR,
b) correlate the various signals in order to localize an event or perform fusion, or c) “image”
(“spatially pixelate”) a region, such as seismic swarm characterization. Experiments designed
to utilize these “network science” techniques are just beginning to emerge.
2. Rover collective. – Multiple rovers act as a coordinated unit to survey a region. Scout class
(i.e., no DTE capability) elements maintain connectivity to base station via “bucket brigade”
communication relay. This latter capability might also be achieved using stationary relay nodes
that a rover drops off as it moves about (possibly picking them back up later).
3. Robotic outpost – Support interaction among a variety of robots and rovers to enable team-
oriented operations such as support for interacting components of an in situ propellant production
process.
4. HEDS outpost – Extension of the robotic outpost to more complex and demanding requirements.
Also, an ad hoc network may be deployed as a supporting infrastructure that provides wireless
connectivity (e.g., voice) and position tracking as humans (etc.) move about.

Surface ad hoc networks are currently under investigation for commercial, military and space
applications. A combination of factors make the space environment unique with respect to the
commercial and military applications and require additional research to realize these surface ad hoc
networks for planetary exploration. The systems will need to be self-organizing and autonomous so
that they can be automatically deployed and robust to faults imposed by the harsh environment.
Overall cost is extremely dependent on the mass and size, greatly limiting the amount of energy or
power generation capability that can be included. This drives the need for high-energy efficiency in
the operational algorithms. Multihop networks that store and forward the information are useful from

NASA/TM—2001-210975 8
an energy efficiency point of view as well as help overcome line-of-site and long distance constraints.
These networks need to adapt in order to squeeze out as much information as conditions permit; to
send data even if holes occur in the file/stream, or perhaps even deliver data with errors as there might
not be another chance to retransmit or collect the data. Most scenarios will benefit from a feed-
forward of assets as much as possible, i.e., to build on previous mission assets as new in situ assets are
overlaid. These will extend over very long time periods in comparison to commercial/military mission
needs.

At the physical layer, the RF regime used is UHF, S-band, and X-band. Antennas are near omni-
directional and are very small and lightweight. Very low power infrared may be included in the
physical layer for very short distances. Very small, low mass and power integrated receivers,
transmitters, and modems will be developed for at the physical layer of the surface proximity
networks.

The surface proximity network's data link layers may use a variation of Proximity-1 that is peer-to-
peer and modified for low energy use or they may be modeled after wireless LAN's such as Bluetooth
or IEEE 802.11, but with modifications. The protocols will accommodate network dynamics such as
faults, ad hoc-style handoff for mobile nodes, and cluster-based network routing and management.
Many other protocol issues specific to sensor networks are currently under investigation in the
research community. Energy efficiency in the link and network layers is important as well as
geographic routing and data aggregation [9]. Most intelligent vehicle systems will likely provide
proxy network services for the simpler more basic systems. Example services include temporary
storage, data routing, multicast capability, time and operations synchronization, and network
provisioning.

Technologies for On-board LAN

The various subsystems on-board the spacecraft are also following the general trend towards
operating as a distributed system of autonomous but cooperating subsystems. The features/functions
of the subsystems are increasingly implemented through software that is running on powerful
processors embedded in the subsystems. The instrument and subsystem network interfaces to the
on-board LAN physical layer are becoming increasingly complex and varied. Depending on the
spacecraft complexity, there may be several types of local busses (e.g., IEEE 1394, Mil-Std 1553,
Switched Ethernet, SpaceWire) that could be involved in information transfer. Further complications
are arising from translating between the various protocols that must be supported.

In recognition of the growing problem, a new CCSDS activity concerned with Spacecraft On-board
Interfaces (SOIF) has been established to define standard interfaces and a common reference model
for future on-board LANS of unmanned spacecraft [10]. The standard will encompass many of the
common on-board busses as well as the link, network, and transport protocols layers.. Protocols that
handle asynchronous data, isochronous data, real-time data and multicasting of data will be
developed, tested and implemented. Gateway functions between the underlying protocols will be
defined. The activity is expected to reduce development costs and risk for the spacecraft itself.
Emergence of a common or standardized addressing scheme at the subsystem or instrument level
will also reduce the complexity of the overall Mars communication architecture and move towards
improving end-to-end interactions by Earth-based scientists and mission operators.

6. Conclusions

The Mars communication architecture has been described for implementation in the near-, mid-, and
far-term. These architectures were based on current activities that are defining future Mars missions.
The communication architectures have been decomposed into five elements: the backbone networks,
three proximity networks (orbiter to/from surface, inter-spacecraft, and Mars surface networks), and
the spacecraft on-board LAN’s. These elements are then used to address the technologies required for
the near to far-term architectures. Many of the technologies are already under definition and
development in various research programs (e.g., [11]). These include microwave transmission devices

NASA/TM—2001-210975 9
and antennas, cryocooled receivers and MMIC’s, high rate modem circuits, optical communication
devices and systems, spacecraft/vehicle on-board LAN’s, and data movement protocols.

The analysis also reveals the following technology gaps: 1) transparency to the application programs
of the underlying communication protocols, 2) autonomous operation of the communication
infrastructure, 3) efficient protocols for the inter-satellite and surface proximity links, 4) gateways
based on common protocol standards and reference models between the architecture elements 5) high
power microwave and optical sources, and 6) lightweight, large aperture antennas.

7. References

[1] Kul Bhasin, Jeffrey L. Hayden, Space Internet Architectures and Technologies for NASA
Enterprises, 2001 IEEE Aerospace Conference, March 2001.
[2] Loren P. Clare, Jonathan R. Agre, Tsun-Yee Yan, Considerations on Communications Network
Protocols in Deep Space, 2001 IEEE Aerospace Conference, March 2001.
[3] Internet Society IPN Special Interest Group, InterPlaNetary Internet Study, http://ipn.jpl.nasa.gov/
[4] R J. Cesarone, R. C. Hastrup, D. J. Bell, D. T. Lyons, and K. G. Nelson, “Architectural Design for
a Mars Communications and Navigation Orbital Infrastructure,” Paper No. AAS 99-300,
AAS/AIAA Astrodynamics Specialist Conference, Girdwood, Alaska, August 16-18, 1999.
[5] CCSDS File Delivery Protocol (CFDP). Draft Recommendation for Space Data Systems
Standards, CCSDS 727.0-R-3. Red Book. Issue 3. Washington, D.C., CCSDS, June 1999.
[6] CCSDS Proximity-1 Space Link Protocol. Draft Recommendation for Space Data Systems
Standards, CCSDS 211.0-R-2. Red Book. Washington, D.C., CCSDS, January 2000.
[7] Bob O’Hara and Al Petrick, IEEE 802.11 Handbook: A Designer’s Companion, Standards
Information Network, IEEE Press, New York, NY, 1999.
[8] Bluetooth, http://www.bluetooth.net, 2000.
[9] G. J. Pottie and W. J. Kaiser, Wireless Integrated Network Sensors, CACM, Vol. 43, No. 5,
May, 2000, pp. 51-58.
[10] CCSDS P1K Subpanel for Spacecraft On-board Interfaces (SOIF),
ftp://ftp.estec.esa.nl/pub/ws/wsd/ccsds/ccsdsoif/.
[11] High Rate Data Delivery, NASA TAP, http://hrdd.grc.nasa.gov

NASA/TM—2001-210975 10
 Form Approved
REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE OMB No. 0704-0188
Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources,
gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this
collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington Headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson
Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188), Washington, DC 20503.
1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED
September 2001 Technical Memorandum
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS

Advanced Communication and Networking Technologies for Mars Exploration

WU–755–1B–00–00
6. AUTHOR(S)

Kul Bhasin, Jeff Hayden, Jonathan R. Agre, Loren P. Clare, and Tsun-Yee Yan

7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION

REPORT NUMBER
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
John H. Glenn Research Center at Lewis Field E–12829
Cleveland, Ohio 44135 – 3191

9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING

AGENCY REPORT NUMBER
National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Washington, DC 20546– 0001 NASA TM—2001-210975
AIAA–2001–289

11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES

Prepared for the 19th International Communications Satellite Systems Conference and Exhibit sponsored by the American Institute of
Aeronautics and Astronautics, Toulouse, France, April 17–20, 2001. Kul Bhasin and Jeff Hayden, NASA Glenn Research Center;
Jonathan R. Agre, Loren P. Clare, and Tsun-Yee Yan, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, California Institute of Technology, 4800 Oak Grove
Drive, Pasadena, Calfornia 91109. Responsible person, Kul Bhasin, organization code 6100, 216–433–3676.

12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE

Unclassified - Unlimited
Subject Categories: 32 and 17 Distribution: Nonstandard
Available electronically at http://gltrs.grc.nasa.gov/GLTRS
This publication is available from the NASA Center for AeroSpace Information, 301–621–0390.
13. ABSTRACT (Maximum 200 words)

Next-generation Mars communications networks will provide communications and navigation services to a wide variety of Mars science vehicles
including: spacecraft that are arriving at Mars, spacecraft that are entering and descending in the Mars atmosphere, scientific orbiter spacecraft, spacecraft
that return Mars samples to Earth, landers, rovers, aerobots, airplanes, and sensing pods. In the current architecture plans, the communication services will
be provided using capabilities deployed on the science vehicles as well as dedicated communication satellites that will together make up the Mars
network. This network will evolve as additional vehicles arrive, depart or end their useful missions. Cost savings and increased reliability will result from
the ability to share communication services between missions. This paper discusses the basic architecture that is needed to support the Mars Communica-
tions Network part of NASA’s Space Science Enterprise (SSE) communications architecture. The network may use various networking technologies such
as those employed in the terrestrial Internet, as well as special purpose deep-space protocols to move data and commands autonomously between vehicles
at disparate Mars vicinity sites (on the surface or in near-Mars space) and between Mars vehicles and earthbound users. The architecture of the spacecraft
on-board local communications is being reconsidered in light of these new networking requirements. The trend towards increasingly autonomous
operation of the spacecraft is aimed at reducing the dependence on resource scheduling provided by Earth-based operators and increasing system fault
tolerance. However, these benefits will result in increased communication and software development requirements. As a result, the envisioned Mars
communications infrastructure requires both hardware and protocol technology advancements. This paper will describe a number of the critical technol-
ogy needs and some of the ongoing research activities.

14. SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUMBER OF PAGES

16
Advanced communication; Networking technologies; Mars exploration 16. PRICE CODE

17. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 18. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 19. SECURITY CLASSIFICATION 20. LIMITATION OF ABSTRACT
OF REPORT OF THIS PAGE OF ABSTRACT
Unclassified Unclassified Unclassified
NSN 7540-01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2-89)
Prescribed by ANSI Std. Z39-18
298-102