Greg Kamer – Principal Systems Engineer

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Discussion on OFDMA in HEW
Advertisements

EETS 8316 : WIRELESS NETWORKS Vamsi Krishna Medharametla
11ac: 5G WiFi The trigger for 5GHz everywhere Led by Apple and other consumer specialists – In-home device sync, video, backup, etc – “Gigabit WiFi” on.
Wireless Networks and Spread Spectrum Technologies.
Aida BotonjićTieto1 LTE Aida Botonjić. Aida BotonjićTieto2 Why LTE? Applications: Interactive gaming DVD quality video Data download/upload Targets: High.
Doc.: IEEE /1228r0 Submission September 2014 xxx, NEWRACOM Issues on 256-FFT per 20MHz Date: Authors: Slide 1.
Doc.: IEEE /1126r0 Submission September 2012 Krishna Sayana, SamsungSlide 1 Wi-Fi for Hotspot Deployments and Cellular Offload Date:
MTBA and PSMP in n Abhay Annaswamy
Doc.: IEEE / Submission March 2013 Juho Pirskanen, Renesas Mobile CorporationSlide 1 Discussion On Basic Technical Aspects for HEW Date:
Doc.: IEEE /1054 Sept 2013 SubmissionYonggang Fang, ZTETX HEW Evaluation Metrics Suggestions Date: Slide 1 Authors: NameAffiliationAddress .
Doc.:IEEE /0633r0 Submission Richard van Nee, Qualcomm May 14, 2009 Slide 1 Strawmodel ac Specification Framework Authors: Date:
Technology training (Session 2)
DL-OFDMA Procedure in IEEE ax
4G-WIRELESS NETWORKS PREPARED BY: PARTH LATHIGARA(07BEC037)
WiMAX 1EEE Protocol Stack
Performance Evaluation for 11ac
Discussions on 11ac PHY Efficiency
Shamir Stein Ackerman Elad Lifshitz Timor Israeli
HEW Evaluation Metrics Suggestions
Comparisons of Simultaneous Downlink Transmissions
Scheduling Information for UL OFDMA Acknowledgement
Long Term Evolution (LTE)
IEEE ah Use Case – Outdoor Wi-Fi for cellular traffic offloading
IS3120 Network Communications Infrastructure
Month Year doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0 May 2010
An Overview of ax Greg Kamer – Consulting Systems Engineer.
Greg Kamer – Consulting Systems Engineer
RTS*/CTS* for UL/DL OFDMA Control
Technology and Use Cases for TGac
160 MHz PHY Transmission Date: Authors: March 2010
Efficient FDMA MU Transmission Schemes for WUR WLAN
Efficient FDMA MU Transmission Schemes for WUR WLAN
OFDMA Performance Analysis
802.11ac Preamble Date: Authors: Month Year Month Year
Below 6GHz 11vht PAR scope and purpose discussion
11ax PAR Verification through OFDMA
Discussions on 11ac PHY Efficiency
RTS*/CTS* for UL/DL OFDMA Control
OFDMA Performance Analysis
Technology and Use Cases for TGac
Mobile cooperation usage models
Partial MAC and PHY Proposal for n
Efficient FDMA MU Transmission Schemes for WUR WLAN
Comparison of Draft Spec Framework Documents
Discussion on 11ah Peak Throughput Requirements
Month Year doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0 May 2010
Efficient FDMA MU Transmission Schemes for WUR WLAN
Considerations on LRLP Transmissions
Multi-AP Enhancement and Multi-Band Operations
Another resource to exploit: multi-user diversity
Packet Design for Wake-up Receiver (WUR)
Dense apartment building use case for HEW
Discussions on 11ac PHY Efficiency
Discussions on 11ac PHY Efficiency
Another resource to exploit: multi-user diversity
Additional Measurements & Analysis Confirming the RLAN Duty Cycle
UL MU Random Access Analysis
Mobile cooperation usage models
Efficient FDMA MU Transmission Schemes for WUR WLAN
OFDMA performance in 11ax
Mobile cooperation usage models
Fix the Issue on Number Of HE-SIG-B Symbols
OFDMA Performance Analysis
Strawmodel ac Specification Framework
Efficient FDMA MU Transmission Schemes for WUR WLAN
Osama Aboul-Magd Huawei Technologies, Canada
Consideration on System Level Simulation
So What’s the big deal with WiFi6.
Multi-AP backhaul analysis
Discussion on 11ah Peak Throughput Requirements
Presentation transcript:

Greg Kamer – Principal Systems Engineer What’s Next - 802.11ax / WiFi 6 Greg Kamer – Principal Systems Engineer

802.11ax – Key Motivations Address 802.11 Limitations New Use-Cases Protocol Overhead & Inefficiency Limited Number of Channels Proliferation of Wi-Fi Devices 8 Devices/User [2012] to 50 Devices/User [2022] IoT: multiple devices, low bandwidth Demand for increased Capacity with QoS Users’ Apps demand more Social Media, On-Demand Video, etc. Proliferation of battery operated devices Lot more contention than users estimate Single Tx Channel High Density Environments 802.11 needs to evolve to work well in dense environments Transportation Hubs, Large Public Venues (stadiums) Increased Outdoor Operation Smart City Initiatives, increased connectivity all over the world Mobile Data Offload - SMS, Twitter, etc. ‘Short Packet’ problem

Wi-Fi Evolution “We need to know where we are coming from to appreciate where we are going” 802.11 (Legacy) 802.11b 802.11a 802.11g 802.11n (HT) 802.11ac (VHT) 802.11ax (HE) Year Ratified 1997 1999 2003 2009 2014 2019 (Expected) Operating Band 2.4 GHz/IR 2.4 GHz 5 GHz 2.4/5 GHz Channel BW 20 MHz 20/40 MHz 20/40/80/160 MHz Peak PHY Rate 2 Mbps 11 Mbps 54 Mbps 600 Mbps 6.8 Gbps 9.6 Gbps Link Spectral Efficiency 0.1 bps/Hz 0.55 bps/Hz 2.7 bps/Hz 15 bps/Hz 42.5 bps/Hz 62.5 bps/Hz Max # SU Streams 1 4 8 Max # MU Streams NA 4 (DL only) 8 (UL & DL) Modulation DSSS, FHSS DSSS, CCK OFDM OFDM, OFDMA Max Constellation / Code Rate DQPSK CCK 64-QAM, 3/4 64-QAM, 5/6 256-QAM, 5/6 1024-QAM, 5/6 Max # OFDM tones 64 128 512 2048 Subcarrier Spacing 312.5 kHz 78.125 kHz

Key 802.11ax Enhancements OFDMA Uplink MU-MIMO PHY and MAC Efficiency Frequency /Subcarriers OFDMA Uplink MU-MIMO PHY and MAC Efficiency 1024-QAM Power Efficiencies BSS Coloring

OFDM vs. OFDMA Borrowing from modern LTE terminology, the 802.11ax standard calls the smallest sub-channel a Resource Unit (RU) AP decides how to allocate the channel, always assigning all available RUs on the downlink. Users will have a smaller, but dedicated, sub-channel, thus improving the average throughput per user

802.11ax – OFDMA Enables Spectral Efficiency User1 User2 User3 User4 OFDM OFDMA Frequency /Subcarriers Frequency /Subcarriers Time Time Channel BW allocated among multiple users Overhead amortized across multiple users Increase in spectral efficiency, Reduced Latency Supports heterogeneous users – i.e. IM vs Large downloads Full Channel Bandwidth allocated to single user Overhead doesn’t scale with payload size

Uplink MU-MIMO Only Downlink MU-MIMO from AP to STA(s) in 802.11ac AP co-ordinated MU grouping of STA(s) and opportunistically transmitted frames 802.11ax introduces Uplink MU-MIMO from STA(s) to AP now co-ordinates multiple STA(s) transmitting simultaneously to AP MU-RTS to STA(s) Trigger to STA(s) Multi-STA Block Ack AP STA(s) Simultaneous CTS to AP Frames to AP from STA(s)

802.11ax – Multi-User Benefits, OFDMA & MU-MIMO Complementary techniques to serve multiple users concurrently OFDMA MU-MIMO Useful when multiple users have small amount of data Useful when multiple users have full buffer traffic Number of concurrent clients can be as high as 74 Number of concurrent clients limited to 8 (introduced in .11ax) Effective at all ranges (close, mid, and far) Effective at close- to mid-range, not effective at far range No sounding overhead for either DL or UL OFDMA Sounding required for DL MU, but not for UL MU Lower latency Tends to increase latency Can be used to mitigate OBSS interference issues No interference mitigation

802.11ax – MAC/PHY Enhancements   802.11ac 802.11ax BANDS 5 GHz 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz CHANNEL BANDWIDTH 20 MHz, 40 MHz, 80 MHz, 80+80 MHz & 160 MHz FFT SIZES 64, 128, 256, 512 256, 512, 1024, 2048 SUBCARRIER SPACING 312.5 kHz 78.125 kHz OFDM SYMBOL DURATION 3.2 us + 0.8/0.4 us CP 12.8 us + 0.8/1.6/3.2 us CP HIGHEST MODULATION 256-QAM 1024-QAM PHY RATES 433 Mbps (80 MHz, 1 SS) 6933 Mbps (160 MHz, 8 SS) 600 Mbps (80 MHz, 1 SS) 9600 Mbps (160 MHz, 8 SS) 11ax benefits extended to 2.4GHz band Unlike 11ac, Clients in 2.4GHz band benefit as well Spectral efficiency – more tones/channel Reduced Overhead, Helps Outdoor Operation 1024-QAM – Higher modulation Quantum jump in highest achievable PHY rates

802.11ax – More Efficiency with Sub-Carrier Spacing In 802.11ax, sub-carrier spacing is reduced to enable a 4X increase in the number of available data-tones, compared to earlier 802.11 specifications. A 4X increase in available data tones, along with 1024-QAM, dramatically increases the maximum PHY rates. More data tones also enable supporting multiple users (max of 74) with OFDMA

802.11ax – Long OFDM Symbol OFDM Symbols in 11g/n/ac GI (Multipath Immunity) “Useful” Portion of OFDM Symbol 3.2 us OFDM Symbols in 11g/n/ac OFDM Symbols in 11ax (Indoor – Increased Throughput Due to Reduced GI Overhead) 12.8 us “Useful” Portion of OFDM Symbol GI (Multipath Immunity) OFDM Symbols in 11ax (Outdoor – Increased Multipath Resilience Due to Longer GI) 12.8 us GI (Multipath Immunity) “Useful” Portion of OFDM Symbol

802.11ax – MAC/PHY Efficiency 802.11a/g 802.11n/ac 802.11ax # of Tones –20MHz 64 256 Sub-carrier spacing 20MHz/64 = 312.5KHz 20MHz/256 = 78.125KHz Data Sub-carriers 48 52 234 Efficiency 75% 81% 91% OFDM Symbol 3.2us 12.8us Guard Interval 0.8us 0.4, 0.8us 0.8, 1.6, 3.2us Symbol Time 4.0us 3.6, 4.0us 13.6, 14.4, 16.0us 80% 90%, 80% 94%, 89%, 80% Increasing PHY-level Efficiency ~17% more efficient than 11n/ac ~40% more efficient than 11a/g

802.11ax – 1024-QAM Constellation constellation diagrams 25% DATA RATE INCREASE 11ac 11ax

802.11ax – Power Efficiency 11ax AP AP STA1 STA2 STA1 STA2 TARGET WAIT TIME AP BEACON TRIGGER TRIGGER STA1 SLEEP AWAKE SLEEP STA2 SLEEP AWAKE Pre-negotiated Wake times between AP and Clients Avoids contention on the air among client devices Scheduled sleep & power-on (awake) times enables efficient power consumptions for clients STA1 STA2

802.11ax – BSS Coloring OBSS – OVERLAPPING Basic Service Set User2 senses interference from both AP1 & AP2 - User2 cannot transmit till medium is completely clear of both APs AP1 User 1 User 2 AP2 User A BSS Coloring – Fixes OBSS problem AP1 User 1 User 2 AP2 User A With BSS Coloring, User2 can ignore Interference from AP2 and transmit as soon as it senses medium is clear of AP1

802.11ax Deployment Considerations Multi-Gigabit Peak Wi-Fi PHY Rates call for Multi-Gig Ethernet Backhaul Peak TCP rates are ~85% of peak Wi-Fi PHY Rates Practical Wi-Fi Spectrum Management considerations dictate useful PHY Bandwidth = 80MHz Higher Power consumption calls for PoE+ supplies from switch/controller Increased power consumption to support higher PHY Rates in 802.11ax 5 GHz Band # Radio Chains 2.4 GHz Band # Radio Chains Average TCP T’put* Ethernet Backhaul Input Power over PoE 8x8 4x4 2.7 Gbps 5 Gbps > PoE+ 1.4 Gbps 2.5 Gbps PoE+ 2x2 0.7 Gbps 1 Gbps PoE