January 2013 doc.: IEEE /0153r0 July 2017

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Doc.: IEEE /1176r0 Submission Sep 2013 Reza Hedayat (Cisco Systems) Slide 1 Some Simulation Scenarios for HEW NameAffiliationPhone Reza HedayatCisco.
Advertisements

Submission doc.: IEEE /0343r1 In Situ Frame Size Measurements March, 2015 Chuck Lukaszewski, Aruba NetworksSlide 1 Date: Authors:
Submission doc.: IEEE /0343r0 In Situ Frame Size Measurements March, 2015 Chuck Lukaszewski, Aruba NetworksSlide 1 Date: Authors:
Handoff Delay for b Wireless LANs Masters Project defense Anshul Jain Committee: Dr. Henning Schulzrinne, Columbia University Dr. Zongming Fei, University.
Industry’s First 3-Stream n Competitive Testing October, 2012.
Submission doc.: IEEE /1063r0 September 2012 Yasuhiko Inoue (NTT)Slide 1 Requirements on WLAN Cellular Offload Date: Authors:
Industry’s First 3-Stream n Competitive Testing October, 2012.
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0026r1 January 2014 Yong Liu, et al.Slide 1 Thoughts on HEW PAR Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0558r1 Submission May 2013 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 1 Coexistence and Optimization of Wireless LAN: Time, Frequency, Space,
Submission doc.: IEEE /0801r1 Akira Kishida, NTT Issues of Low-Rate Transmission Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0648r0 Submission May 2014 Chinghwa Yu et. al., MediaTekSlide 1 Performance Observation of a Dense Campus Network Date:
Doc.: IEEE /0065r0 Submission January 2014 William Carney, SONYSlide 1 Comments on Draft HEW PAR Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0786r0 Submission July 2013 Wu TianyuSlide 1 Discussions on System Level Simulation Methodology Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0542r0 SubmissionSimone Merlin, QualcommSlide 1 HEW Scenarios and Goals Date: Authors: May 2013.
SubmissionSlide 1Dwight Smith, Motorola Mobility Nov 2012doc.: IEEE 11-12/1332r0 Other Service Discovery Concepts Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /1259r0 SubmissionYunlu Liu (China Mobile)Slide 1 Measurement Reporting in WLAN Date: Authors: Nov 2012.
Doc.: IEEE /0754r0 Submission July 2015 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 1 IEEE ax High Efficiency WLAN WLAN Packet traffic and efficiency.
Copyright © 2003 OPNET Technologies, Inc. Confidential, not for distribution to third parties. Wireless LANs Session
Submission doc.: IEEE /0587r0 May 2016 Peter Khoury, Ruckus WirelessSlide 1 Dwell Time In Probe Request Presentation Date: Authors:
Support for Advance Antennas & Techniques in WNM
PHY recommended practice
Wireless Networking Business Unit
Jaime Johnson Yuhang Lin Nathan Daniel Anil Koneri Vineeth Chander
January 2013 doc.: IEEE /0153r0 July 2017
WNG SC Agenda Date: Authors: July 2017 July 2013
11ax PAR Verification using UL MU-MIMO
April 2009 doc.: IEEE /xxxxr0 May 2014
Some Findings from Real World Measurement
Proposed Evaluation Methodology Additions
Month Year doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0 January 2012
WUR Discovery Frame and Discovery Channel
WUR and Efficiency Tradeoffs
Closing Report Date: Authors: November 2010 November 2010
TGaq Transaction Protocol
[Preliminary Simulation Results on Power Saving]
Measurements of behavior in different environments
Short Slot Time Option for TGg
[Preliminary Simulation Results on Power Saving]
Raising the PAR Date: Authors: January 2014 January 2014
Closing Report Date: Authors: March 2015 July 2013
WLAN network behavior under heavy load
Is for “Wireless Fidelity” Or IEEE Standard By Greg Goldman
Closing Report Date: Authors: November 2012 November 2012
Closing Report Date: Authors: July 2015 July 2013
Closing Report Date: Authors: May 2011 May 2011
Closing Report Date: Authors: November 2011 November 2011
WNG SC Agenda Date: Authors: July 2017 July 2013
Mutliband-60GHz-Location-Capability-Publishing
AP Discovery using WUR Date: 08/11/2016 Authors: November 2016 Name
WNG SC Agenda Date: Authors: July 2017 July 2013
VHT - SG Date: Authors: July 2007 Month Year
Closing Report Date: Authors: January 2015 July 2013
WNG Closing Report Date: Authors: July 2014 January 2013
WNG SC Agenda Date: Authors: July 2017 July 2013
WNG SC Closing Report Date: Authors: May 2019 July 2013
Power Efficient WUR AP Discovery
TGr Closing Report for May 2008
Multi-link Operation Framework
Multi-link Operation Framework
Multi-link Operation Framework
Closing Report Date: Authors: May 2012 May 2012
LC MAC submission – follow up
Report on Date: Authors: July 2019 July 2013
Performance aspects of Multi-link operations with constraints
LC MAC submission – follow up
Multi-link Operation Framework
Closing Report Date: Authors: July 2013 July 2013
Multi-link power save operation
Multi-link Operation Framework
Multi-link Operation Framework
Presentation transcript:

January 2013 doc.: IEEE 802.11-13/0153r0 July 2017 Measurements of temporal occupancy and a comparison of indoor performance of OFDM vs CCK/DSSS Authors: Date: 2016-07-11 Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder) Clint Chaplin, Chair (Samsung)

Abstract As a class project, students made measurements of: January 2013 doc.: IEEE 802.11-13/0153r0 July 2017 Abstract As a class project, students made measurements of: 1) Channel occupancy of WLAN traffic in different environments to assess how much time is spent in each of the data rates and overall protocol efficiency, and 2) Comparison of indoor performance of OFDM vs CCK/DSSS Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder) Clint Chaplin, Chair (Samsung)

1) Channel occupancy - Problem Statement July 2017 1) Channel occupancy - Problem Statement Use packet capture and analysis tools to analyze the temporal occupancy, packet type distribution, and data rate distribution of deployed 802.11 systems in the following environments: High density, unmanaged public retail networks Managed university network (campus-wide ESS) Residential unmanaged networks Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

July 2017 Methodology Most students used Microsoft Network Monitor to capture packets Has a “monitor mode” to capture packets by scanning across channels (unassociated) Some students used OmniPeek if they had access Save as a .cap file so Wireshark can analyze Students used Excel to create charts Some wrote custom scripts to analyze packets Summarize results in reports Most students only examined 2.4GHz networks, so that is all that will be summarized here Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

July 2017 Data Capture #1 Microsoft Network Monitor (free) can be used to capture packets in any channel in unassociated mode - OmniPeek has the same capability, but isn’t free Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

Data capture #2 Wireshark used to sort and classify packet traffic July 2017 Data capture #2 Wireshark used to sort and classify packet traffic Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

Locations for Measurements July 2017 Locations for Measurements Pearl Street Mall (dense retail shops) Unmanaged networks University of Colorado Campus Managed network – ESS Residential environment Dorm, apartment, house Pearl Street Mall Engineering - University of Colorado at Boulder Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

Results #1: Pearl Street (1/2) July 2017 Results #1: Pearl Street (1/2) Number of Packets Collected: ~12,000 Collection Date & Time: 04/24/2017 @ 2:40pm Collection Length: 00:02:39 Over 75% of packets transmitted at data rate of 1&2Mbps and almost 69% of time at 1Mbps Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

Results #1: Pearl Street (2/2) July 2017 Results #1: Pearl Street (2/2) Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

Results #2: CU-Boulder (1/2) July 2017 Results #2: CU-Boulder (1/2) Number of Packets Collected: ~12,000 Collection Date & Time: 04/17/2017 @ 4:00pm Collection Length: 00:02:57 Over 70% of the packets used data rate of 1&2Mbps with over 53% of time at 1Mbps. Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

Results #2: CU-Boulder (2/2) July 2017 Results #2: CU-Boulder (2/2) Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

Results #3: Residential (1/2) July 2017 Results #3: Residential (1/2) Number of Packets Collected: ~11,000 Collection Date & Time: 04/23/2017 @ 12:10am Collection Length: 00:02:12 Although over 29% of packets used data rate of 1Mbps, the time spent at this data rate was ~15%. Over 25% of packets used data rate of 54Mbps (59% of the time) and ~28% of packets used a rate of 24Mbps (3.1% of the time). Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

Results #3: Residential (2/2) July 2017 Results #3: Residential (2/2) Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

2) Indoor OFDM vs DSSS/CCK - Problem Statement July 2017 2) Indoor OFDM vs DSSS/CCK - Problem Statement Use packet capture and analysis tools to compare the performance of OFDM preambles vs DSSS/CCK preambles: Assess PER or throughput vs distance Compare indoor and outdoor if possible Ensure that captured packets are only coming from the target AP, which has been configured to run iPerf with the desired preamble type Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

Indoor measurements – Discovery Learning Center @ CU-Boulder July 2017 Indoor measurements – Discovery Learning Center @ CU-Boulder Cisco Aironet 2700 Dual Band Access Point and Iperf 3 AP manually configured to send only 1Mbps for DSSS tests AP manually configured for OFDM-only preambles and 7Mbps payload for OFDM tests Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

Indoor measurements – raw data July 2017 Indoor measurements – raw data Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

Indoor measurements - graph July 2017 Indoor measurements - graph Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

Summary (2.4GHz) 1Mbps traffic predominates July 2017 Summary (2.4GHz) 1Mbps traffic predominates Beacons Probe request/response - In congested environment, many more probe responses than probe requests RTS/CTS Over 75% of packets were 1Mbps management frames in congested environments OFDM preambles performed much better than DSSS indoors Always delivered better throughput at the same range Difficult to assess failed preambles, but throughput results were consistent All papers are available Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)