System Performance Results for Scenario 1 Santosh Abraham, Arnaud Meylan, Sanjiv Nanda Qualcomm, Inc. snanda@qualcomm.com

Simulation Methodology July 12-16, 2004 Simulation Methodology The simulator is based on ns2 Includes physical layer features TGn Channel Models PHY Abstraction determines frame loss events MAC features EDCA Adaptive Coordination Function (ACF): SCHED and SCAP Frame Aggregation ARQ with Block Ack Closed Loop Rate Control (DRVF and DRV) MIMO Modes (ES and SS) Transport File Transfer mapped to TCP QoS Flows mapped to UDP

Structure of the Simulator July 12-16, 2004 Structure of the Simulator

Layered Structure for 802.11 Simulation July 12-16, 2004 Layered Structure for 802.11 Simulation

Statistics Obtained Throughput: For each flow denote Mean Delay: July 12-16, 2004 Statistics Obtained Throughput: As defined in CC 20. Throughput Metric 2. For each flow denote tl: Time at which the last packet is transferred to the receiver LLC tf: Time at which the first packet arrives at the sender MAC SAP N: Number of packets delivered within the delay bound to the receiver LLC by tl p: Packet size. Flow Throughput = Mean Delay: Mean of the time taken from packet arrival at the sender to packet arrival at the receiver across all packets of the flow.

Statistics Obtained Packet Loss Rate: As defined in CC 19 July 12-16, 2004 Statistics Obtained Packet Loss Rate: As defined in CC 19 Number of MSDUs that are not delivered at the Rx MAC SAP within the specified delay bound, divided by the total number of MSDUs offered at the Tx MAC SAP Reasons for a packet being dropped are: Delay incurred by the packet exceeds the delay tolerance of the flow. Delay is inclusive of scheduling and retransmission attempts. Packet has not been delivered after a maximum number of transmission attempts.

Statistics Obtained Mean PHY Rate: As defined in CC 27: July 12-16, 2004 Statistics Obtained Mean PHY Rate: As defined in CC 27: N: Number of packets transmitted. ri: PHY Transmission rate of ith packet. ti: Transmission time of the ith packet Mean PHY Rate =

Simulation Scenarios Modified TGn Usage Models Scenario 1 July 12-16, 2004 Simulation Scenarios Modified TGn Usage Models Scenario 1 Channel Model B Scenario 1 HT (High Throughput) Increased Offered Non-QoS Load. Additional 25 Mbps Internet file transfer at 15.5 m for 2x2 Additional 100 Mbps Internet file transfer at 15.5 m for 4x4 Scenario 1 LD (Low Delay) Reduce all multimedia application delays to 50 ms. Scenario 1 IR (Increased Range) HDTV receivers moved to 25 m (instead of 5 m)

Simulation Conditions July 12-16, 2004 Simulation Conditions Simulation Parameters Alternate values considered in italics ACF and EDCA Frame Aggregation Block ACK (Delayed ACK) Highest MCS: 7 bits/symbol. Also considered 5 bits/symbol All links: 2x2. Also considered 4x4. 5.25 GHz EDCA Parameters

Performance Metrics Per flow Per scenario Throughput July 12-16, 2004 Performance Metrics Per flow Throughput Packet loss rate (PLR) Mean delay Time-averaged PHY data rate Per scenario Total throughput, Latency of QoS flows, Throughput for non-QoS flows MAC Efficiency

Scenario 1 HT (High Throughput) July 12-16, 2004 MAC Mode MAC Efficiency Total Throughput QoS Flows Latency and Packet Loss Rate (PLR) Non-QoS Throughput Scenario 1 HT (High Throughput) ACF 0.77 107.27 HDTV/SDTV mean delay < 18 ms Gaming PLR ~ 10^-3 55.42 EDCA with Frame Aggr 0.46 59.42 HDTV/SDTV mean delay < 10 ms Gaming PLR > 10% MP3 PLR ~ 10^-3 7.40 Scenario 1 LD (Low delay) ACF 0.76 103.53 HDTV/SDTV mean delay < 10 ms Gaming PLR ~ 10^-3 51.64 EDCA with Frame Aggr 0.48 60.40 HDTV/SDTV PLR ~ 10^-3 Gaming PLR > 10% MP3 PLR ~ 10% 8.46 Scenario 1 IR (Increased Range) ACF 0.76 93.57 HDTV/SDTV mean delay < 10 ms SDTV PLR ~ 10^-3 Gaming & VOD Ctrl PLR ~ 10^-3 41.69 EDCA with Frame Aggr 0.56 59.15 HDTV/SDTV PLR ~ 10^-3 Gaming PLR > 10% MP3 PLR > 10% 7.24

Scenario 1 IR Using ACF: Per Flow Results July 12-16, 2004 Scenario 1 IR Using ACF: Per Flow Results

Scenario 1 IR 2x2 Scenario 1 IR 4x4 MAC Mode MAC Efficiency July 12-16, 2004 MAC Mode MAC Efficiency Total Throughput QoS Flows Latency and Packet Loss Rate (PLR) Non-QoS Throughput Scenario 1 IR 2x2 ACF 0.76 93.57 HDTV/SDTV mean delay < 10 ms SDTV PLR ~ 10^-3 Gaming & VOD Ctrl PLR ~ 10^-3 41.69 EDCA with Frame Aggr 0.56 59.15 HDTV/SDTV PLR ~ 10^-3 Gaming PLR > 10% MP3 PLR > 10% 7.24 Scenario 1 IR 4x4 ACF 0.74 190.17 HDTV/SDTV mean delay < 10 ms Gaming PLR ~ 10^-3 138.27 EDCA with Frame Aggr 0.35 70.44 HDTV/SDTV PLR ~ 10^-3 Gaming PLR > 10% MP3 PLR ~ 5% 18.46

Scenario 1 HT Maximum 5 bits/symbol July 12-16, 2004 MAC Mode MAC Efficiency Total Throughput QoS Flows Latency and Packet Loss Rate (PLR) Non-QoS Throughput Scenario 1 HT Maximum 5 bits/symbol ACF 0.78 90.62 HDTV/SDTV mean delay < 20 ms 38.75 EDCA with Frame Aggr 0.52 59.93 HDTV/SDTV mean delay < 10 ms Gaming PLR> 10% Video CTRL ~ 10^-2 7.97 Scenario 1 LD Maximum 5 bits/symbol ACF 0.75 86.74 HDTV/SDTV mean delay <10 ms SDTV PLR ~10^-4 34.85 EDCA with Frame Aggr 0.53 60.98 HDTV/SDTV PLR ~ 10^-3 VoIP PLR ~ 10% Gaming and MP3 PLR > 10% 9.00 Scenario 1 IR Maximum 5 bits/symbol ACF 0.76 79.48 HDTV/SDTV mean delay < 10 ms SDTV & Gaming PLR ~ 10^-3 27.61 EDCA with Frame Aggr 0.59 58.51 HDTV/SDTV PLR ~ 10^-2 Gaming and MP3 PLR > 10% VoIP PLR < 10% 6.65

Conclusions from Scenario 1 Study July 12-16, 2004 Conclusions from Scenario 1 Study TGn Usage Models Scenario 1 requirements can be met and exceeded with 2x2. Using Scheduled operation: MAC Efficiency is in the range 74%-78%. Scenario 1 HT: Throughput can be increased to above 100 Mbps Scenario 1 LD: Video stream latency can be reduced below 50 ms (from 200 ms). Total throughput: 103 Mbps Scenario 1 IR: Range of HDTV flows can be increased from 5 m to 25 m. Total throughput: 92 Mbps MAC Efficiency of EDCA with Frame Aggregation is around 56% for 2x2 and falls to 35% for 4x4. Throughput with 256 QAM ~15% throughput improvement with 256 QAM By setting Maximum MCS=5 bits/symbol obtain 80-92 Mbps for IR, LD, HT.