November 2007 Project: IEEE P802.15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Issues on Superframe Size for Uncompressed Video Traffic] Date Submitted: [November 10, 2007] Source: [Wooyong Lee1, Jinkyeong Kim1, Yongsun Kim1, Kyeongpyo Kim1, Hyoungjin Kwon1, Kyungsup Kwak2, Seokho Kim2, Xizhi An2, Saurabh N. Mehta2, Zhiquan Bai2, Sangkyoon Nam2] Company: [Electronics and Telecommunications Research Institute (ETRI)1, Inha University2] Address: [ETRI, 161 Gajeong-dong, Yuseong-gu, Daejeon, 305-700, Republic of Korea]1, [6-141B, Inha University, 253 Yonghyun-dong, Nam-gu, Incheon, 402-751, Republic of Kore]2 Voice: [], FAX: [], E-Mail: [kskwak@inha.ac.kr (other contributors are listed in “Contributors” slides)] Re: [] Abstract: [Comparison between two different superframe sizes] Purpose: [To be considered in IEEE 802.15.3c standard] Notice: This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P802.15. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein. Release: The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P802.15. ETRI

Contributors Name E-mail Affiliation Wooyong Lee wylee@etri.re.kr ETRI November 2007 Contributors Name E-mail Affiliation Wooyong Lee wylee@etri.re.kr ETRI Jinkyeong Kim jkkim@etri.re.kr Yongsun Kim doori@etri.re.kr Kyeongpyo Kim kpkim@etri.re.kr Hyoungjin Kwon kwonjin@etri.re.kr Kyungsup Kwak kskwak@inha.ac.kr Inha University Seokho Kim sylvstar@inhaian.net Xizhi An anxizhi@inhaian.net Saurabh N. Mehta smehta@inhaian.net Zhiquan Bai sdzqbai@inhaian.net Sangkyoon Nam sknam@inhaian.net ETRI

November 2007 Overview Consider uncompressed video transmission traffic for analysis and simulation Simulation and analytical results for uncompressed video transmission traffic for different superframe size are given The significance of beacon period in the superframe is analyzed Compare two superframe size: 2ms & 1/60s ETRI

802.15.3c Performance Metrics Analysis of 802.15.3c MAC in terms of: <month year> doc.: IEEE 802.15-07-0896-00-003c November 2007 802.15.3c Performance Metrics Analysis of 802.15.3c MAC in terms of: Throughput and End-to-End Delay for traffic flow of upper layer, especially, Uncompressed Video Transmission Throughput, measured in terms of bits per second, is the amount of data delivered successfully by the peer MAC-SAP End-to-End Delay, measured in terms of second, is the amount of time taken for a MAC SDU to be transferred from the MAC-SAP of the transmitter to the peer MAC-SAP of the receiver. ETRI <author>, <company>

Uncompressed Video Streaming November 2007 Simulation Model(UM1) PNC Control/commands Beacon Uncompressed Video Streaming 1080p 30f 20b DEV-0 DEV 1 LRT(1.530Gbps) Common mode(48.5Mbps) Uncompressed Traffic Model :1080p 30f 20b -2200(1920+280)*1125(1080+45)*30*20 = 1.485 Gbps -CBR traffic -> 44000bit(2200*20) / 29.63us ETRI

CoMPA’s Superframe Structure November 2007 CoMPA’s Superframe Structure BP: Beacon Period CAP: Contention Access Period CTAP: Channel Time Allocation Period GT: Guard Time PLCP: Physical Layer Convergence Protocol ETRI

Considering Superframe Structure November 2007 Considering Superframe Structure ETRI

Beacon Frame with CTA IE November 2007 Beacon Frame with CTA IE * Note 1: It shows the minimal length of beacon frame with CTA IE included. Note 2: In this example, there is one Channel Time Allocation (CTA) IE that contains one CTA block assigning the channel time for one traffic flow. * PLCP header (17 octets) = PHY header (5 octets) + MAC header (10 octets) + HCS (2 octets) ETRI

Preamble and PLCP Header November 2007 Parameters Assumed Use common mode beacon to 47.8 Mbps Assume error free PHY channel Set video traffic to CBR traffic mode One MAC SDU is composed of data bits transmitted in one video line. Assume no buffer delay due to higher data rate Assume no propagation delay due to short distance ( < 10 meter). Consider transmission delay in terms of Overhead & Payload Size Parameters Value Superframe Size 1 msec ~ 64 msec Beacon Interval 15.344 usec CAP Duration 0 / 200 usec Guard Time 0.02 usec SIFS 2.5 usec Preamble and PLCP Header 8.157 usec PHY-SAP Rate 1530 Mbps Payload Size 2 KB ~ 64 KB Sub-header Size 4 Bytes ACK Policy N/A Aggregation Method Applied MAC-SDU Size 5.5 KB ETRI

Analytical Analysis(1) November 2007 Analytical Analysis(1) Maximum Achievable Throughput (MAC Capacity) Results (When MSDU= Payload Size) ETRI

Analytical Analysis(2) November 2007 Analytical Analysis(2) Maximum Achievable Throughput (MAC Capacity) Results (When MSDU= Payload Size) ETRI

Analytical Analysis(3) November 2007 Analytical Analysis(3) Throughput Results (When MSDU = 5.5 KB and with aggregation) ETRI

Analytical Analysis(4) November 2007 Analytical Analysis(4) Throughput Results (When MSDU = 5.5 KB and with aggregation) ETRI

(MAC SDU size = Payload size) November 2007 Simulation Results (1) MAC Capacity without CAP (MAC SDU size = Payload size) ETRI

(MAC SDU size = Payload size) <month year> doc.: IEEE 802.15-07-0896-00-003c November 2007 Simulation Results (2) MAC Capacity with CAP (MAC SDU size = Payload size) ETRI <author>, <company>

Video 1080p 30f 20b 1.485Gbps (MAC SDU = 5.5 KB ) November 2007 Simulation Results (3) Performance of video transmission, without CAP Video 1080p 30f 20b 1.485Gbps (MAC SDU = 5.5 KB ) ETRI

Video 1080p 30f 20b 1.485Gbps (MAC SDU = 5.5 KB ) November 2007 Simulation Results (4) Performance of video transmission, with CAP Video 1080p 30f 20b 1.485Gbps (MAC SDU = 5.5 KB ) ETRI

November 2007 Conclusions We present the comparison of different superframe sizes in terms of delay and throughput. Analysis and simulation results show that 1/30(1/60)s is better than 2ms for the uncompressed video transmission in terms of delay and throughput. It is necessary to increase superframe size and use aggregation method, in order to achieve high throughput. Minimum data-rate requirement for uncompressed video traffic is 1.485 Gbps for the given traffic model With 1530Mbps PHY-SAP it is not possible to transfer the uncompressed video traffic. For UM1, CAP does not have any significant usage for large superframe size. In the small superframe, the throughput or efficiency is low due to the expense of beacon period. ETRI

November 2007 Appendix ETRI

Superframe Size (msec.) November 2007 Table 1. PHY-SAP Capacity Without CAP (Maximum Achievable Throughput) Superframe Size (msec.) Payload Size (KB) Given Throughput PHY-SAP Rate (Gbps) 1 2 0.49 3.03 8 0.788 1.88 16 0.875 1.69 64 0.95 1.56 0.79 1.87 0.88 1.68 0.96 1.54 4 1.86 10 0.5 2.97 20 0.8 1.85 ETRI

Superframe Size (msec.) November 2007 Table 2. PHY-SAP Capacity With CAP = 200 usec (Maximum Achievable Throughput) Superframe Size (msec.) Payload Size (KB) Given Throughput PHY-SAP Rate (Gbps) 1 2 0.39 3.80 8 0.63 2.35 16 0.69 2.15 64 0.75 1.98 0.44 3.37 0.71 2.09 0.79 1.87 0.86 1.72 4 0.47 3.15 0.78 0.87 1.76 0.91 1.63 10 0.49 3.03 1.90 1.70 0.94 1.57 20 3.00 1.68 0.95 1.56 ETRI

Superframe Size (msec.) November 2007 Table 3. PHY-SAP With CAP = 200 usec (When MSDU = 5.5KB and aggregation method) Superframe Size (msec.) Payload Size (KB) Given Throughput PHY-SAP Rate (Gbps) 1 2 0.37 4.13 5.5 0.57 2.68 11 0.66 2.30 0.42 3.58 0.65 2.35 0.75 2.02 4 0.45 3.37 0.69 2.20 0.8 1.91 10 0.46 3.26 0.71 2.13 0.82 1.86 20 0.47 3.22 0.72 2.10 0.83 1.84 ETRI

Superframe Size (msec.) November 2007 Table 4. PHY-SAP Without CAP (When MSDU = 5.5KB and aggregation method) Superframe Size (msec.) Payload Size (KB) Given Throughput PHY-SAP Rate (Gbps) 1 2 0.47 3.25 5.5 0.72 2.12 11 0.83 1.84 3.22 2.10 0.84 1.82 4 3.20 0.73 2.09 1.81 10 2.08 20 3.19 1.80 ETRI

Number of MSDUs in CTAP MSDU=5.5KB and PHY-SAP 1530Mbps November 2007 Number of MSDUs in CTAP MSDU=5.5KB and PHY-SAP 1530Mbps Payload Size (KB) Superframe Size (ms) withcap =200 usec 1 2 4 10 20 12 27 59 154 309 5.5 19 44 94 244 494 11 22 50 108 280 568 24 54 116 304 616 Payload Size (KB) Superframe Size (ms) without cap 1 2 4 10 20 15 31 62 156 313 5.5 24 49 99 249 499 11 28 56 114 286 574 22 60 124 308 620 Note: One video line duration is 30.9 usec ETRI

Number of MSDUs in CTAP MSDU=5.5KB and PHY-SAP 2000Mbps November 2007 Number of MSDUs in CTAP MSDU=5.5KB and PHY-SAP 2000Mbps Payload Size (KB) Superframe Size (ms) with cap = 200 usec 1 2 4 10 20 13 31 67 177 351 5.5 23 54 114 302 599 11 28 64 136 358 710 22 68 148 396 776 Payload Size (KB) Superframe Size (ms) without cap 1 2 4 10 20 17 35 70 177 354 5.5 29 60 120 302 605 11 34 142 358 718 22 36 76 156 396 792 Note: One video line duration is 30.9 usec ETRI

Parameters on Video Resolution November 2007 Parameters on Video Resolution Formant V Freq HRES VRES DE_CNT DE_LIN Rate 24bit Rate 20bit Hsync (sec) Vsync (sec) 1080i 30 2200 562/ 563 1920 1080 5760 4800 3.77104E-06 0.000652/ 0.000681 1080p 1125 0.001333 60 1.88552E-06 0.000667 ETRI