Zafer Sahinoglu, Ghulam Bhatti, Anil Mehta

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
APCC October - 3 November 2010 Langham Hotel, Auckland, New Zealand Youn-Soon Shin, Kang-Woo Lee and Jong-Suk Ahn Dongguk Univ.
Advertisements

Nov. 2 th, 2010 Hyung Wook Cho Utilization-Aware Dynamic GTS Allocation Scheme in IEEE APCC 2010.
Channel Allocation Protocols. Dynamic Channel Allocation Parameters Station Model. –N independent stations, each acting as a Poisson Process for the purpose.
The ALOHA Protocol “Free for all”: whenever station has a frame to send, it does so. –Station listens for maximum RTT for an ACK. –If no ACK after a specified.
EECC694 - Shaaban #1 lec #5 Spring Data Link In Broadcast Networks: The Media Access Sublayer Broadcast networks with multi-access (or random.
Ethernet – CSMA/CD Review
David Ripplinger, Aradhana Narula-Tam, Katherine Szeto AIAA 2013 August 21, 2013 Scheduling vs Random Access in Frequency Hopped Airborne.
Evaluate IEEE e EDCA Performance Tyler Ngo CMPE 257.
MAC Protocols Media Access Control (who gets the use the channel) zContention-based yALOHA and Slotted ALOHA. yCSMA. yCSMA/CD. TDM and FDM are inefficient.
Doc.: IEEE Submission 15 November 2005 Analysis of CAP of IEEE Superframe Iyappan Ramachandran University of Washington November 15, 2005.
Distributed Priority Scheduling and Medium Access in Ad Hoc Networks Distributed Priority Scheduling and Medium Access in Ad Hoc Networks Vikram Kanodia.
Performance Evaluation of IEEE
1 QoS Schemes for IEEE Wireless LAN – An Evaluation by Anders Lindgren, Andreas Almquist and Olov Schelen Presented by Tony Sung, 10 th Feburary.
Analysis of the Performance of IEEE for Medical Sensor Body Area Networking ECE 5900 Computer Engineering Seminar Instructor: Dr. Chigan Huaming.
1 The Simulative Investigation of Zigbee/IEEE By, Vaddina Prakash Rao Under the Guidance of, Dipl.-Ing. Dimitri.
1 Intermediate report on Performance Analysis of Zigbee Wireless Personal Area Networks By, Vaddina Prakash Rao Under.
Wireless LAN Simulation - IEEE MAC Protocol
IEEE High Rate WPAN - MAC functionalities & Power Save Mode Mobile Network Lab. 정상수, 한정애.
جلسه دهم شبکه های کامپیوتری به نــــــــــــام خدا.
Doc.: IEEE k Submission July, 2011 Slide 1 Inha Univ/ETRI Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks.
November 4, 2003APOC 2003 Wuhan, China 1/14 Demand Based Bandwidth Assignment MAC Protocol for Wireless LANs Presented by Ruibiao Qiu Department of Computer.
Doc.: IEEE Submission, Slide 1 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title:
7-1 Introduction to Queueing Theory l Components of a queueing system n probability density function (pdf) of interarrival times n pdf of service times.
Doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0 SubmissionMukul Goyal, U Wisconsin MilwaukeeSlide 1 Impact of IEEE n Operation On IEEE Performance Notice: This.
Performance Analysis of IEEE Distributed Coordination Function (DCF) Author : Giuseppe Bianchi Presented by: 李政修 December 23, 2003.
Access Delay Distribution Estimation in Networks Avideh Zakhor Joint work with: E. Haghani and M. Krishnan.
Ch 12. Multiple Access. Multiple Access for Shared Link Dedicated link – Point-to-point connection is sufficient Shared link – Link is not dedicated –
Planning and Analyzing Wireless LAN
Doc.: IEEE /30r2 SubmissionMukul Goyal, U Wisconsin MilwaukeeSlide 1 Impact of IEEE n Operation On IEEE Performance Notice: This.
Performance Evaluation of IEEE
MAC Sublayer MAC layer tasks: – Control medium access – Roaming, authentication, power conservation Traffic services – DCF (Distributed Coordination.
e Submission, Slide 1 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [The embedded.
1 Ethernet CSE 3213 Fall February Introduction Rapid changes in technology designs Broader use of LANs New schemes for high-speed LANs High-speed.
TG4e doc.: IEEE e September 2008 W.-C. Jeong Slide 1 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission.
Performance Investigation and Optimization of IEEE for Industrial Wireless Sensor Networks MOHSIN HAMEED, HENNING TRSEK, OLAF GRAESER AND JUERGEN.
AN EFFICIENT TDMA SCHEME WITH DYNAMIC SLOT ASSIGNMENT IN CLUSTERED WIRELESS SENSOR NETWORKS Shafiq U. Hashmi, Jahangir H. Sarker, Hussein T. Mouftah and.
MAC Protocols for Sensor Networks
Balancing Uplink and Downlink Delay of VoIP Traffic in WLANs
Introduction to Queueing Theory
David S. L. Wei Joint Work with Alex Chia-Chun Hsu and C.-C. Jay Kuo
High Speed LANs – Ethernet and Token Ring
Submission Title: [QoS Support in Wireless BANs]
CS526 Wireless Sensor Networks
ISM Band Radio Radio Protocols and Topology
Using Dynamic PCF to improve the capacity of VoIP traffic in IEEE 802
<month year> doc.: IEEE < e > <Sep 2008>
Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Emergent Modification for Wireless Industry Control]
Submission Title: [Extend-Superframe and Extend-GTS Structure]
Department of Computer Science Southern Illinois University Carbondale CS441-Mobile & Wireless Computing IEEE Standard.
Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [A Dynamic Framed Slotted ALOHA protocol.
Author: Giuseppe Bianchi
Submission Title: [Reliable Multicast for PAC]
The Impact of Multihop Wireless Channel on TCP Performance
Wireless LAN Simulation IEEE MAC Protocol
18 March 2008 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Superframe Extension for ] Date.
24 February 2019 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Issues with Beacon-Mode SuperFrame.
Impact of IEEE n Operation On IEEE Performance
<month year> doc.: IEEE e doc.: IEEE < e >
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
18 March 2008 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Extending the MAC Superframe of
doc.: IEEE <doc#>
4 May 2019 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Issues with Beacon-Mode SuperFrame Structure.
Impact of IEEE n Operation On IEEE Performance
Enhanced-DCF Wireless MAC Protocol: Some Simulation Results
The System Issues of Rate Adaptation
How MAC interacts with Capacity of Ad-hoc Networks – Interference problem Capacity of Wireless Networks – Part Page 1.
Chapter 6 Multiple Radio Access.
18 March 2008 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [Superframe Extension for ] Date.
November 2008 Hybrid MAC for VANET Date: Authors:
Presentation transcript:

Zafer Sahinoglu, Ghulam Bhatti, Anil Mehta Low Latency Channel Access Scheme for Time Critical Applications A modified IEEE 802.15.4 Super-frame structure by Zafer Sahinoglu, Ghulam Bhatti, Anil Mehta

Ultra-reliable Wireless Network Motivation Current IEEE 802.15.4 Channel Access Scheme (CAS) Improved CAS Approach Simulation settings Simulation results – latency and reliability Theoretical validation Future work

Current IEEE 802.15.4 Channel Access Scheme (CAS) beacon Superframe interval beacon Beacon interval GTS CAP CFP Inactive CAP GTS GTS GTS ~= Beacon Interval DATA ACK This is latency only for one hop You can at the earliest transmit here Single failure in GTS frame transmission results in large delay Once failed, there is no way to re-transmit in CAP of SAME active region

Current IEEE 802.15.4 CAS – with retransmissions in CAP beacon Superframe interval beacon Beacon interval GTS CAP CFP Inactive CAP GTS GTS GTS ~= Beacon Interval DATA ACK This is latency only for one hop Allowing retransmissions in CAP in 802.15.4 MAC Consider a small change to allow retransmitting failed GTS frames in CAP

Improved CAS Approach Superframe interval beacon Beacon interval beacon GTS GTS CFP CAP Listen CFP CAP GTS GTS GTS GTS DATA ACK DATA ACK DATA ACK 3.84 ms 1st retransmission in the CAP 2nd retransmission (successful) Consider a small change to allow retransmitting failed GTS frames in CAP Now lets flip ‘CFP’ and ‘CAP’ regions

Improved CAS Approach Superframe interval beacon Beacon interval beacon 33.06 ms GTS GTS CFP CAP Listen CFP CAP GTS GTS GTS GTS DATA ACK DATA ACK DATA ACK 3.84 ms 1st retransmission in the CAP 2nd retransmission (successful) Two suggested modifications for reduction in latency and increase in reliability are Allow for retransmissions in CAP FLIP CFP and CAP

Extended GTS 1st retransmission CFP for retries GTS GTS CFP CAP Listen CFP CAP GTS GTS GTS GTS DATA ACK DATA ACK 1st retransmission Dynamically allocate new GTS slots to nodes with failed GTS transmissions Use ‘GACK’ frame at end of every CFP period to maintain sync Provides 2 collision free and 1 contention based transmission period

Class of CAS schemes studied CAS with no GTS retransmission in CAP CAS with GTS retransmissions in CAP CAS with XGTS and GTS retransmissions in CAP All above schemes drop a GTS frame if it has failed transmission for one Super-Frame and a new GTS frame awaits transmission We study GTS transmission delay vs. CSMA load; Channel error probability GTS frame drop vs. CSMA load; Channel error probability

Theoretical Analysis – Variables Defined Δ - average GTS frame transmission delay Pe – average channel packet error; we keep it constant β – Probability of Collision free transmission (includes probability of successful channel access) γ – Probability of successfully transmitting a frame in CAP which starts competing for channel at beginning of CAP ζ – average maximum number of transmission attempts for a frame in a CAP BI – length of the Beacon Interval in seconds ε – GTS frame transmission time, including ack frame reception time and L/SIFS δ – average delay for sending a GTS frame in CSMA period λGTS – average frame arrival rate for GTS frames per node Q1 – Probability of number of frames in queue ≤ 1

Theoretical Analysis – GTS Frame Transmission Delay Transmission Delay for scheme with no CAP retransmission Transmission Delay for scheme with CAP retransmission Transmission delay with packet drop included

Theoretical Analysis – GTS Frame Drop Packet loss rate for schemes without retransmission of GTS frames in CAP Packet loss rate for schemes with retransmission of GTS frames in CAP

Simulation settings Platform: OPNET 11.0 Simulated CAS schemes Standard IEEE 802.15.4 MAC After swapping CFP and CAP periods After enabling GTS retransmissions in CAP period (2) and (3) combined Key assumptions: Arrivals are Poisson distributed All packets have equal length If a new GTS frame arrives before retransmission of a GTS frame, the retransmission is cancelled and the frame is dropped Long buffers to prevent buffer overflow

Simulation settings WPAN Settings: Beacon Order = 5, Superframe Order = 3 Star network 27 End Nodes and 1 PAN Coordinator Node All 7 GTS allocated to 7 of the 27 nodes, hybrid nodes GTS and CSMA traffic sources are independent All traffic is ‘acked’ CSMA/CA Setting Minimum Backoff Exponent – [2 - 5] Maximum Backoff Number – 4 CCA Window – 2 Max Frame Retries – 3

Simulation results – GTS transmission delay vs CSMA load less CSMA load implies HIGHER GTS latency for Standard 802.15.4 MAC with retransmissions λGTS = 0.5 frames /sec /node, Pe = 0.1

Simulation results – GTS frame drop rate vs CSMA load λGTS = 0.5 frames /sec /node, Pe = 0.1 Extended GTS shows dedicated slots provide guaranteed results than leaving re-transmission to CAP period.

Probability of Channel Error vs GTS drop rate λGTS = 0.5 frames /sec /node and λCSMA load = 0.125 frames/ sec/ node

Simulation results – Probability of channel error vs Simulation results – Probability of channel error vs GTS Transmission Delay λGTS = 0.5 frames /sec /node and λCSMA load = 0.125 frames/ sec/ node

Simulation results – CSMA Queue Size λGTS = 0.5 frames /sec /node, Pe = 0.1

Simulation results – CSMA Transmission Delay λGTS = 0.5 frames /sec /node, Pe = 0.1

Salient Features of Extended GTS scheme Major reduction in GTS transmission delay Significant reduction in GTS frame drop rate GTS drop rate and transmission delay nearly independent of CSMA load Equal or better performance in increasing channel error than other schemes Tolerable increase in CSMA queue size and queuing delay due to resource re-allocation