OBSS_PD: Threshold problems

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Dynamic Sensitivity Control V2
Advertisements

Submission doc.: IEEE /1225r1 Considerations on CCA for OBSS Opearation in ax Date: Slide 1Huawei Authors:
Discussion on The Receiver Behavior for DSC/CCAC with BSS Color
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/1148r1 Consideration of asynchronous interference in OBSS environment Date: Authors: September 2014 Slide 1Koichi.
Doc.: IEEE /0861r0 SubmissionSayantan Choudhury Impact of CCA adaptation on spatial reuse in dense residential scenario Date: Authors:
Submission doc.: IEEE /0085r1 Jan 2015 John Son, WILUS InstituteSlide 1 Legacy Fairness Issues of Enhanced CCA Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /1420r1Nov 2014 Submission Po-Kai Huang (Intel) Slide 1 The Impact of Preamble Error on MAC System Performance Date: NameAffiliationsAddressPhone .
Doc.: IEEE /1187r1Sep 2014 Submission Po-Kai Huang (Intel) Slide 1 The Effect of Preamble Error Model on MAC Simulator Date: NameAffiliationsAddressPhone .
Discussions on the Definition of CCA Threshold
802.11ax scenario 1 CCA Date: Authors: March 2015
Doc.: IEEE /1153r0 Submission September 2013 Laurent Cariou (Orange)Slide 1 Simulation scenario proposal Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /1290r0 Submission Nov 2013 Dynamic Sensitivity Control for HEW SG Date: Authors: Graham Smith, DSP GroupSlide 1.
Doc.: IEEE /1207r1 Submission September 2013 Matthew Fischer et al (Broadcom)Slide 1 CID 205 BSSID Color Bits Date: Authors:
Doc.: ax Submission July 2014 Slide 1 Proposed Calibration For MAC simulator Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0523r0 Submission April 2014 Imad Jamil (Orange)Slide 1 MAC simulation results for Dynamic sensitivity control (DSC - CCA adaptation)
Doc.: IEEE r0 Amin Jafarian, Newracom 1 CCA Revisit May 2015 NameAffiliationsAddressPhone Amin
Doc.: IEEE /1110r0 Amin Jafarian, Newracom 1 September 2015 BSS-TXOP NameAffiliationsAddressPhone Amin
Doc.: IEEE /0645 Submission May 2012 Open-Loop Link Margin Index for Fast Link Adaptation Date: Authors: Slide 1Yong Liu, Marvell,
Doc.: IEEE /0212r3 Submission Feb 2016 TG ax Enterprise Scenario, Color and DSC Date: Authors: Graham Smith, SR TechnologiesSlide 1.
Doc.: IEEE /0635r1 Submission May 2014 Dynamic Sensitivity Control Implementation Date: 2014-May Authors: Graham Smith, DSP GroupSlide 1.
Secondary Channel CCA of HE STA
Simulation results for spatial reuse in 11ax
CCA Sensitivity Date: September 2017
TG ax A Unified Approach to Spatial Reuse
TG ax Indoor Enterprise Scenarios, Color, DSC and TPC
Performance Evaluation of OBSS Densification
Proposed response to 3GPP ED request
Simulation results for
Heads We Win, Tails We Don’t Lose: Proposals for Dynamic CCA
Additional Test Cases for MAC calibration
Simulation Results for Box5
SLS Box5 Calibration Results and Discussions
2840 Junction Ave. San Jose, CA 95134
The Effect of Preamble Error Model on MAC Simulator
Support for Deferral Management in v
Clarifications for OBSS_PD-based SR parameters
Proposed Resolution to CID 12194
Simulation Results for Box5
Comparison of Draft Spec Framework Documents
CCA Sensitivity Date: September 2017
Joint submission for Box 5 calibration
Marvell Semiconductor
Simulation results for
Effect of CCA in residential scenario part 2
Increased Network Throughput with Channel Width Related CCA and Rules
TG ax A Unified Approach to Spatial Reuse
OBSS Preamble Detection
Simulation Results for Box5
NGV Backward Interoperability: Follow-up
2840 Junction Ave. San Jose, CA 95134
Box5 Calibration Results
Box5 Results of 11ac SS6 Date: Authors: Jan 2015 Sept 2014
Considerations on CCA for OBSS Opearation in ax
Performance Gains from CCA Optimization
802.11ax scenario 1 CCA Date: Authors: March 2015
BSS Color Settings for a Multiple BSSID Set
Box 5 Calibration Result
Fix the Issue on Number Of HE-SIG-B Symbols
Strawmodel ac Specification Framework
802.11ax scenario 1 CCA Date: Authors: March 2015
Simulation results for
Cooperative AP Discovery
TG ax A Unified Approach to Spatial Reuse
Month Year doc.: IEEE y18/r0 March 2018
System Level Simulator Evaluation with/without Capture Effect
DSC Calibration Result
LC MAC submission – follow up
LC MAC submission – follow up
802.11ax scenario 1 CCA Date: Authors: March 2015
Month Year doc.: IEEE y18/r0 March 2018
Presentation transcript:

OBSS_PD: Threshold problems Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-16/xxxxr0 March 2017 OBSS_PD: Threshold problems Date: 2017-03-08 Sean Coffey, Realtek Sean Coffey, Realtek

Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-16/xxxxr0 March 2017 Abstract OBSS_PD, in the form described in D1.0, implements the so- called “proportional rule”, with an OBSS_PD_min value of -82 dBm. The rule, as described in D1.0, may lower system efficiency in many scenarios, and it’s at the very least questionable whether it is an overall net positive. This presentation outlines the rule and its effects (positive and negative) and proposes fixes that will make it work better. CIDs addressed: 6768; partially relevant to CIDs referencing OBSS_PD thresholds: 3198, 3199, 3200, 5204, 5205, 5207, 5208, 5484, 5489, 5494, 5495, 5496, 5497, 5499, 5500, 5501, 5502, 5503, 5690, 5691, 5870, 7122, 7123, 7129, 7406, 7612, 8073, 8104, 8232, 8239, 9315,9540, 9944, 9946, 9947, 10031, 10032, 7125, 3197, 5689, 9541, 3222, 3196, 6025, 7823, 8233 Sean Coffey, Realtek Sean Coffey, Realtek

Spatial Reuse first principles, 1/6 Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-16/xxxxr0 March 2017 Spatial Reuse first principles, 1/6 The basic goal of spatial reuse: (Consider unmanaged deployments only) A C E   B D F Increase number of successful transmissions: Add new transmissions and/or Turn failing transmissions successful  Increase OBSS_PD threshold  Reduce Tx power Sean Coffey, Realtek Sean Coffey, Realtek

OBSS-PD SR   March 2017 Note that OBSS-PD SR Allows more transmission in the red shaded area which causes interference to RX. Reduction in SR TX power leads to reduction of interference (orange shaded area) Note increase of interference statistically. Denser operation allows Increased interference from SR STA due to OBSS_PD SR OBSS_PD level > -82dBm CCA=-82dBm Reduced interference from SR STA due to reduced TX power TX RX   Based on and adapted from [1, 3] and similar presentations Sean Coffey, Realtek

Spatial Reuse first principles, 2/6 Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-16/xxxxr0 March 2017 Spatial Reuse first principles, 2/6 A specific case: Can C lower Tx power enough to permit A  B to succeed? It’s possible. But it’s usually very difficult. Effective noise floor @ B (with no interference—cf. next slide) is -95 dBm B may be closer to C or farther away; on average about same distance C interference @ B under proportional rule  -82 dBm 13 dB too high! A C   B D (Assume 20 MHz channels, 6 dB noise figure) Sean Coffey, Realtek Sean Coffey, Realtek

Spatial Reuse first principles, 3/6 Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-16/xxxxr0 March 2017 Spatial Reuse first principles, 3/6 A specific case, contd. & refined: C has lowered Tx power using proportional rule C @ A = -82 dBm We will do a random drop of B inside this circle A uses conservative MCS (interference, stability): A  B succeeds if C @ B is  -88 dBm (7 dB SINR margin) |CB|  1.48 |CA| 73% probability that A  B fails -91 dBm (4 dB margin): 100% -82 dBm (13 dB margin): 40% Random drop of B in circle -88 dBm A C -82 dBm FAIL A = victim Tx B = victim Rx C = interferer Tx Sean Coffey, Realtek Sean Coffey, Realtek

Spatial Reuse first principles, 4/6 Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-16/xxxxr0 March 2017 Spatial Reuse first principles, 4/6 A specific case: Can C lower Tx power enough to permit A  B to succeed? We start out with a 13 dB gap we need to make up If there’s a higher effective noise floor due to interference, and if we add a generous MCS margin, can make up some of that gap —Lowers A  B MCS M … i … g … h … t work (Need to avoid a net loss) A C   B D (Assume 20 MHz channels, 6 dB noise figure) Sean Coffey, Realtek Sean Coffey, Realtek

The -82 dBm CCA threshold—1/4 Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-16/xxxxr0 March 2017 The -82 dBm CCA threshold—1/4 Why is the baseline CCA Threshold = -82 dBm? Why not -95 dBm or some other lower value? Dev 1 Dev 2 Dev 3 Because there’s another constraint: Device 3 must decode the 6 Mbps L-SIG from device 1, to read the duration and set the NAV CCA Threshold should be adequate to permit 6 Mbps L-SIG to be decoded (most of the time) by all devices Sean Coffey, Realtek Sean Coffey, Realtek

The -82 dBm CCA threshold—2/4 Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-16/xxxxr0 March 2017 The -82 dBm CCA threshold—2/4 This is exactly where the -82 dBm CCA threshold comes from: “CCA sensitivity The start of a valid OFDM transmission at a receive level equal to or greater than the minimum 6 Mbit/s sensitivity (-82 dBm) shall cause CCA to indicate busy with a probability >90% within 4 μs.” —802.11a-1999 (R2003), section 17.3.10.5 Sean Coffey, Realtek Sean Coffey, Realtek

The -82 dBm CCA threshold—3/4 Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-16/xxxxr0 March 2017 The -82 dBm CCA threshold—3/4 … and huge margins were built in: “Receiver minimum input level sensitivity The packet error rate (PER) shall be less than 10% at a PSDU length of 1000 bytes for rate-dependent input levels shall be the numbers listed in Table 91 or less. The minimum input levels are measured at the antenna connector (NF of 10 dB and 5 dB implementation margins are assumed).” —802.11a-1999 (R2003), section 17.3.10.1 Sean Coffey, Realtek Sean Coffey, Realtek

The -82 dBm CCA threshold—4/4 Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-16/xxxxr0 March 2017 The -82 dBm CCA threshold—4/4 Full calculation that led to -82 dBm: -102.1 dBm1 + 4.7 dB2 + 10 dB3 + 5 dB4 = -82.4 dBm,  -82 dBm5 Corresponding calculation if specified today: -102.1 dBm + 4 dB(2) + 6 dB(3) = -92.1 dBm,  -92 dBm Noise floor for 16.25 MHz Operating point for 6 Mbps 1,000 byte packets, 10% FER, from the simulations used Noise figure Implementation margin See docs. IEEE 802.11-99/023, “Comments on P802.11a draft”, M. Morikura (NTT), January 1999 (giving curves, -88 dBm for first three combined), and IEEE 802.11-99/016, “Comments received on 802.11a in Letter Ballot 16”, January 9, 1999, pp. 7-8 (-87.4 dBm for first three, proposing -82 dBm) Sean Coffey, Realtek Sean Coffey, Realtek

The CCA threshold, if rederived today Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-16/xxxxr0 March 2017 The CCA threshold, if rederived today Additional adjustments required Use SNR needed to decode the L-SIG (4 bytes), instead of 1,000 bytes Perhaps 3-4 dB lower? Use SNR needed to decode L-SIG with frequency-selective fading rather than AWGN (as 802.11a did, in effect) E.g. channel model D, but conditioned on given RSSI Perhaps 4-5 dB higher? Net result (rough estimates), in the range (-92 dBm … -89 dBm) for 1 SS device; in the range (-95 dBm … -92 dBm) for 2 SS devices Most 2 SS devices today should be able to decode the L-SIG in practice with RSSI of -92 dBm or higher, most of the time - Sean Coffey, Realtek Sean Coffey, Realtek

CCA threshold, summary -82 dBm Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-16/xxxxr0 March 2017 CCA threshold, summary -82 dBm So what’s this? It’s the level at which devices have to stop pretending they can’t hear L-SIGs. Because it was not credible (in 1999!) that any device would not have been able to decode at this level. This accounts for 10 dB of our 13 dB “gap”. Every 2 SS device should be able to decode most L-SIGs here—close to -95 dBm—from here “proportional rule” starts to make sense -92 dBm -95 dBm Desirable limit of interference Sean Coffey, Realtek Sean Coffey, Realtek

OBSS-PD SR, 2/2   March 2017 Note that OBSS-PD SR Allows more transmission in the red shaded area which causes interference to RX. Reduction in SR TX power leads to reduction of interference (orange shaded area) Note increase of interference statistically. Denser operation allows Increased interference from SR STA due to OBSS_PD SR OBSS_PD level > -82dBm CCA=-82dBm Reduced interference from SR STA due to reduced TX power TX RX   Based on and adapted from [1, 3] and similar presentations Sean Coffey, Realtek

Spatial Reuse first principles, 5/6 Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-16/xxxxr0 March 2017 Spatial Reuse first principles, 5/6 The other case: (Consider unmanaged deployments only) A C E   B D F Transmit power control can only help reuse Maybe increased OBSS_PD threshold is the incentive to use TPC also? Devices lose when they’re B but “statistically” gain when they’re F Sean Coffey, Realtek Sean Coffey, Realtek

Spatial Reuse first principles—6/6 Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-16/xxxxr0 March 2017 Spatial Reuse first principles—6/6 OBSS_PD as a tradeoff—more transmit opportunities as incentive to lower transmit power Well … maybe. (It seems a bit hazy. Are we sure this is a net gain?) Also note that: This can only be a factor when we have 3 or more OBSSs—no possible gain from this factor when we have just 2 OBSSs The OBSS_PD rule is dynamic: why would the interferer reduce its transmit power when it does not encounter neighbors it otherwise would defer to? I.e., interferer adapts to its neighboring traffic; if no need to increase OBSS_PD threshold in recent time, why lower transmit power? When increased OBSS_PD threshold is used, we are with high probability killing the frame we are transmitting over Sean Coffey, Realtek Sean Coffey, Realtek

A way to fix this Involve the victim AP in the decision loop! Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-16/xxxxr0 March 2017 A way to fix this Involve the victim AP in the decision loop! This is a very complicated feature to specify and analyze, featuring multiple BSSs (possibly multiple OBSSs), traffic modelling, projections of future deployments and many topics that we have always left out of the standardization process (rate selection & shifting algorithms, fragmentation policy, latency and power management, interference assessment and mitigation, etc.) The one unifying principle: if the victim AP is happy, everyone is happy All we need to do is to provide a way for the victim AP to permit OBSS_PD over frames in its BSS (or rather, to disallow if the default is to permit), with just enough incentive for permission to be granted Sean Coffey, Realtek Sean Coffey, Realtek

Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-16/xxxxr0 March 2017 A sample approach Assign bit combination in HE-SIG-A field to turn off non-SRG OBSS_PD, i.e., *other* STAs may not use non-SRG OBSS_PD over that frame STAs may only use the appropriate bit combination if given permission by the AP to which they’re associated Permission can come from BSS-wide policy bits set in the beacon (and changeable dynamically). Permission can come from an individually addressed frame from the AP, giving permission. Such permission, even if granted, only lasts for N successful frames transmitted by that STA. STAs may only use non-SRG OBSS_PD themselves if they have permitted it for the last N frames transmitted by that STA Sean Coffey, Realtek Sean Coffey, Realtek

Straw poll (informational) Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-16/xxxxr0 March 2017 Straw poll (informational) Do you agree to modify the OBSS_PD mechanism to allow for victim transmitters to disable use by other devices of non-SRG OBSS_PD for the frame in progress, according to the approach described on slide 18 of this document? Y N A Sean Coffey, Realtek Sean Coffey, Realtek

Month Year doc.: IEEE 802.11-16/xxxxr0 March 2017 References [1] IEEE doc. 11/14-0637r0, “Spatial Reuse and Coexistence with Legacy Devices”, J. Wang (MediaTek) et al., May 2014 [2] IEEE doc. 11/14-0872r0, “A Protocol Framework for Dynamic CCA,” S. Coffey (Realtek) et al., July 2014 [3] IEEE doc. 11/15-1069r3, “Adaptive CCA and TPC”, J. Wang (MediaTek) et al., September 2015 [4] IEEE doc. 11/15-1082r1, “Analysis of BSS and ESS Structure During Concurrent SR Transmissions”, C. Lukaszewski (Aruba Networks), September 2015 [5] IEEE doc. 11/15-1083r3, “Cost/Benefit Analysis of SR Techniques (a.k.a. Grand Unified Theory of Spatial Reuse)”, C. Lukaszewski, L. Li (Aruba Networks), September 2015 Sean Coffey, Realtek Sean Coffey, Realtek