doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/243r2 Submission May 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 1 Proposed Changes to the 802.11e D1.0 Draft Mathilde Benveniste.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Doc.: IEEE /144 Submission March 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 1 An E-DCF Proposal Using TCMA Mathilde Benveniste AT&T Labs,
Advertisements

Doc.: IEEE /375 Submission November 2000 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 1 Tiered Contention, A QoS-Based Distributed Medium Access.
Doc.: IEEE /630r1a Submission S. Choi, Philips Research November 2001 Slide 1 HC Recovery and Backoff Rules Sunghyun Choi and Javier del Prado.
Doc.: IEEE /630r4a Submission S. Choi, Philips Research January 2002 Slide 1 HC Recovery and Backoff Rules Sunghyun Choi and Javier del Prado.
Slide 1 doc.: IEEE /1092r0 Submission Simone Merlin, Qualcomm Incorporated September 2010 Slide 1 ACK Protocol and Backoff Procedure for MU-MIMO.
Channel Allocation Protocols. Dynamic Channel Allocation Parameters Station Model. –N independent stations, each acting as a Poisson Process for the purpose.
Introduction to IEEE Wireless LAN Standard Huafeng Lü Sep 10, 2002.
Doc.: IEEE /xxxr0 Submission January 2004 Mathilde Benveniste, Avaya Labs -- ResearchSlide 1 Clarifications on APSD Mathilde Benveniste Avaya.
Doc.: IEEE /328r0 Submission May 2001 Menzo Wentink, Intersil Slide 1 Interpretations of Backoff Menzo Wentink Intersil
Doc.: IEEE /1019r1 Submission July 2011 MediaTek, Inc Slide 1 Supporting Large Number of STAs in ah Date: Authors:
1 Medium Access Control Enhancements for Quality of Service IEEE Std e TM November 2005.
Copyright © 2003, Dr. Dharma P. Agrawal and Dr. Qing-An Zeng. All rights reserved. 1 Chapter 6 Multiple Radio Access.
1 QoS Schemes for IEEE Wireless LAN – An Evaluation by Anders Lindgren, Andreas Almquist and Olov Schelen Presented by Tony Sung, 10 th Feburary.
802.11g & e Presenter : Milk. Outline g  Overview of g  g & b co-exist QoS Limitations of e  Overview of.
Opersating Mode DCF: distributed coordination function
MAC layer Taekyoung Kwon. Media access in wireless - start with IEEE In wired link, –Carrier Sense Multiple Access with Collision Detection –send.
Computer and Data Communications Semester Mohd Nazri Mahmud Session 4a-12 March 2012.
IEEE Wireless LAN Standard. Medium Access Control-CSMA/CA IEEE defines two MAC sublayers Distributed coordination function (DCF) Point coordination.
IEEE EDCF: a QoS Solution for WLAN Javier del Prado 1, Sunghyun Choi 2 and Sai Shankar 1 1 Philips Research USA - Briarcliff Manor, NY 2 Seoul National.
1 Medium Access Control Enhancements for Quality of Service IEEE Std e TM November 2005.
Doc.: IEEE /065r0 Submission January 2001 Brockmann, Hoeben, Wentink (Intersil) g MAC Analysis Menzo Wentink Ron Brockmann.
Chapter 6 Multiple Radio Access
SubmissionJoe Kwak, InterDigital1 BSS Load: AP Loading Metric for QOS Joe Kwak InterDigital doc: IEEE /0079r1May 2005.
Submission doc.: IEEE /569r1 November 2001 M. Benveniste -- AT&T Labs, ResearchSlide 1 An Access Mechanism for Periodic Contention-Free Sessions.
WLAN. Networks: Wireless LANs2 Distribute Coordination Function (DCF) Distributed access protocol Contention-Based Uses CSMA/ CA – Uses both physical.
Doc.: IEEE /243r1 Submission May 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 1 Proposed Changes to the e D1.0 Draft Mathilde Benveniste.
SubmissionJoe Kwak, InterDigital1 BSS Load: AP Loading Metric for QOS Joe Kwak InterDigital doc: IEEE /0079r0January 2005.
Doc.: IEEE /171 Submission July 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 1 HCF Access through Tiered Contention Mathilde Benveniste.
Doc.: IEEE /456 Submission December 2000 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 1 Backward Compatibility of ‘Tiered Contention’ Multiple.
Doc.: IEEE /494r0 Submission July 2001 Michael Fischer, Intersil (TGe Editor)Slide 1 Provisional Tge Ballot Comment Resolutions from the May,
Doc.: IEEE /457 Submission December 2000 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 1 An Enhanced-DCF Proposal Based on ‘Tiered Contention’
MAC Layer Protocols for Wireless Networks. What is MAC? MAC stands for Media Access Control. A MAC layer protocol is the protocol that controls access.
MAC for WLAN Doug Young Suh Last update : Aug 1, 2009 WLAN DCF PCF.
Resolutions to Static RTS CTS Comments
Doc.: IEEE /361 Submission October 2000 Wim Diepstraten, LucentSlide 1 Distributed QoS resolution Greg Chesson-Altheros Wim Diepstraten- Lucent.
Doc.: IEEE /0415r0 Submission April mc CIDs 1136,1118,1458 Date: Authors: Graham Smith, DSP GroupSlide 1.
Submission doc.: IEEE /599r1 November 2001 M. Benveniste -- AT&T Labs, ResearchSlide 1 ‘Cyclic Prioritized Multiple Access (CPMA): An Access Mechanism.
COE-541 LAN / MAN Simulation & Performance Evaluation of CSMA/CA
November 2000 Jin-Meng Ho, Texas InstrumentsSlide 1 doc.: IEEE /367 Submission p-DCF for Prioritized MAC Service Jin-Meng Ho, Sid Schrum, and.
November 2000 Jin-Meng Ho, Texas InstrumentsSlide 1 doc.: IEEE /367r1 Submission p-DCF for Prioritized MAC Service (Expanded version based on.
DSSS PHY packet format Synchronization SFD (Start Frame Delimiter)
doc.: IEEE /409r0 Submission March 2002 Mathilde BenvenisteSlide 1 Persistence Factors in EDCF Mathilde Benveniste
Doc.: IEEE /034r0 Submission January 2002 Matthew B. Shoemake, TGg ChairpersonSlide 1 TGg Report to the IEEE Working Group Matthew B. Shoemake.
Doc.:IEEE /566r2 Submission November 2001 S. Choi, Philips & M.M. Wentink, Intersil Slide 1 Multiple Frame Exchanges during EDCF TXOP Sunghyun.
Submission doc.: IEEE /596r1 November 2001 M. Benveniste -- AT&T Labs, ResearchSlide 1 ‘Neighborhood Capture’ in Wireless LANs Mathilde Benveniste.
Doc.: IEEE /145r1 Submission March 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 1 E-DCF with Backoff Adaptation to Traffic Mathilde Benveniste.
AIFS – Revisited Mathilde Benveniste
EA C451 (Internetworking Technologies)
Overview of ‘Tiered Contention’ Multiple Access (TCMA)
An Access Mechanism for Periodic Contention-Free Sessions
IEEE : Wireless LANs ALOHA, Slotted ALOHA
AP Service Load: Improved Definition
HCF medium access rules
Neighborhood Capture and OBSS
AIFS – Revisited Mathilde Benveniste
NAV Protection Mathilde Benveniste Avaya Labs, Research July 2003
EIFS Correction Mathilde Benveniste Dongyan Chen
EDCA Backoff Rules Mathilde Benveniste
doc.: IEEE /457 Mathilde Benveniste AT&T Labs, Research
EDCF Issues and Suggestions
E-DCF with Backoff Adaptation to Traffic
HCF Channel Access And Inter-BSS Channel Sharing
HCF medium access rules
Neighborhood Capture and OBSS
802.11e features for the enterprise
HCF medium access rules
HCF medium access rules
NAV Protection Mathilde Benveniste Avaya Labs, Research July 2003
Chapter 6 Multiple Radio Access.
‘Shield’: Protecting High-Priority Channel Access Attempts
Presentation transcript:

doc.: IEEE /243r2 Submission May 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 1 Proposed Changes to the e D1.0 Draft Mathilde Benveniste AT&T Labs, Research

doc.: IEEE /243r2 Submission May 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 2 Inter-frame Spaces and Backoff Procedure Figure 49 - Some IFS Relationships AIFS[j] AIFS[i] DIFS/AIFS Contention Window Slot time Busy Medium Defer Access Next Frame Select Slot and Decrement Backoff as long SIFS PIFS DIFS/AIFS Immediate access when Medium is free >= DIFS/AIFS[i] as medium is idle Backoff-Window Earliest Tx time for STAs, or ESTAs, with backoff=1 -- AIFS = DIFS Earliest Tx time for top-priority ESTAs with backoff=1 -- AIFS = PIFS

doc.: IEEE /243r2 Submission May 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 3 Priority higher than legacy  AIFS=PIFS Using AIFS[i]=PIFS is feasible because The backoff time at the end of a busy period is 1 or greater for all STAs with interrupted backoff procedure. By requiring the random backoff drawn to be 1 or greater for ESTAs with AIFS[i]=PIFS, transmission will occur the earliest at DIFS.  There are no collisions with PC or HC.

doc.: IEEE /243r2 Submission May 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 4 AIFS properties Property 1 (Backward compatibility): There must exist one EDCF traffic category that describes the behavior of legacy STAs Property 2: For legacy-equivalent ESTAs, AIFS has the role of DIFS. According to Note in , which reads: “Note:the default value for aAIFS [TC] is 2 for each Traffic Class (TC). Therefore the default settings for TxAIFS [TC ] are equivalent to DIFS for each TC.” the following holds:  The default AIFS=DIFS, which shall correspond to the TC equivalent to legacy

doc.: IEEE /243r2 Submission May 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 5 Timing Relationships Clause defines DIFS as follows: “A STA using the DCF shall be allowed to transmit if its carrier sense mechanism (see 9.2.1)determines that the medium is idle at the TxDIFS slot boundary after a correctly- received frame,and the backoff time for that TC has expired.” Clause defines AIFS as follows: “A STA using the EDCF shall be allowed a transmit opportunity (TxOP) for a particular Traffic Class (TC)if its carrier sense mechanism (see 9.2.1)determines that the medium is idle at the TxAIFS [TC ] slot boundary (see ) after a correctly-received frame,and the backoff time for that TC has expired.” Given the above definitions,  the timing relationships in Clause (Figure 58.1) are incorrect by Property 2 [which requires that ESTAs with AIFS=DIFS and legacy STAs have identical backoff procedure].

doc.: IEEE /243r2 Submission May 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 6 AIFS=DIFS Not legacy-like behavior! Figure 58.1 EDCF Timing Relationships for the Example Case in Which AIFS = DIFS

doc.: IEEE /243r2 Submission May 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 7 Corrections Needed in Clause Remove Figure 58.1 Modify Figure 58 as follows: Figure DCF Timing Relationship and EDCF Timing Relationships for the Example Case in Which AIFS = DIFS ______________________ Changes to existing text in current draft are shown underlined and in red for additions and (italicized in blue and in parentheses) for deletions. PHYRXEND.indicate Rx/Tx Medium Busy D1 M1D2 CCAdel M2 Rx/Tx D2 CCAdel M2 Rx/Tx D2 CCAdel M2 Rx/Tx SIFS PIFS DiFS/AIFS Slot Time Slot Time Slot Time First Backoff Slot TxSIFS Slot Boundary TxPIFS Slot Boundary TxUAT Slot Boundary First Backoff Slot Boundary Slot Time D1 = aRxRFDelay + aRxPLCPDelay (referenced from the end of the last symbol of a frame on the medium) D2 = D1 + Air Propagation Time Rx/Tx = aRXTXTurnaroundTime (begins with a PHYTXSTART.request) M1 = M2 = aMACPrcDelay CCAdel = aCCATime - D1 MAC Slot Boundaries

doc.: IEEE /243r2 Submission May 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 8 Backoff Procedure Clause describes the backoff procedure as follows: “To begin the backoff procedure, the STA shall set its Backoff Timer to a random backoff time using the equation in All backoff slots occur following a DIFS period during which the medium is determined to be idle for the duration of the DIFS period, or following an EIFS period during which the medium is determined to be idle for the duration of the EIFS period following detection of a frame that was not received correctly, or for EDCF stations for each queue[i] during and following a AIFS[i] period during which the medium is determined to be idle for the duration of the AIFS[i] period, the first slot time occurring during the last slot interval of the AIFS[i] period.”  The above is inconsistent with Property 2 [which requires that ESTAs with AIFS=DIFS and legacy STAs have identical backoff procedure].

doc.: IEEE /243r2 Submission May 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 9 Corrections Needed in Clause Modify text as follows: To begin the backoff procedure, the STA shall set its Backoff Timer to a random backoff time using the equation in All backoff slots occur following a DIFS period during which the medium is determined to be idle for the duration of the DIFS period,or following an EIFS period during which the medium is determined to be idle for the duration of the EIFS period following detection of a frame that was not received correctly,or for EDCF stations for each queue [i ] (during and) following an AIFS [i ] period during which the medium is determined to be idle for the duration of the AIFS [i ] period (the first slot time occurring during the last slot interval of the AIFS[i] period). ______________________ Changes to existing text in current draft are shown underlined and in red for additions and (italicized in blue and in parentheses) for deletions.

doc.: IEEE /243r2 Submission May 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 10 Random Backoff Time Clause reads: “Backoff Time [i ] =Random(i) x aSlotTime Where: Random(i)=Pseudo random integer drawn from a uniform distribution over the interval [1,CW[i]+1], where CW [i ]is an integer within the range of values of the MIB attributes aCWmin [i ]and aCWmax (or optionally aCWmax [i] if available)),aCWmin [i ] <=CW [i ] <=aCWmax. “  The above is inconsistent with Property 1 [which requires backward compatibility] As written, legacy STAs will perform better than ESTAs with traffic of equivalent priority to legacy as the random backoff time of the ESTAs would be greater by 1.

doc.: IEEE /243r2 Submission May 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 11 Corrections Needed in Clause must be added only to the random backoff of ESTAs with AIFS[i]=PIFS (the top priority traffic categories). ESTAs with AIFS  DIFS may draw random backoff times as low as 0 Modify text as follows: Backoff Time [i ] =[Random(i)+X]x aSlotTime Where: [1,CW [i ]+1 ]) Random(i)=Pseudo random integer drawn from a uniform distribution over the interval ([1,CW [i ]+1 ]) [0, CW[i]], where CW [i ]is an integer within the range of values of the MIB attributes aCWmin [i ]and aCWmax (or optionally aCWmax [i] if available)),aCWmin [i ] <=CW [i ] <=aCWmax. and X = 0for all legacy STAs and each ESTA traffic category with a value of AIFS>PIFS. X = 1for each ESTA traffic category with a value of AIFS=PIFS. ______________________ Changes to existing text in current draft are shown underlined and in red for additions and (italicized in blue and in parentheses) for deletions.

doc.: IEEE /243r2 Submission May 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 12 Simplify Calculation of Retry Window Size Clause Contention Window Persistence Factor ( P 60, L 38-45) Background The new contention window size CW[i] used upon transmission retry, following a failure, is calculated so that computationally convenient values are always used. The new window size is calculated from the previous window size by multiplication with the persistence factor PF[i] (see Clause ). This factor is used in EDCF because the AP is able to adapt CW min to current traffic/contention conditions; doubling the backoff window upon each retransmission attempt [i.e., always setting PF=2] would cause the backoff window to grow too fast, with long delays and delay jitter as the result. Lower values of PF are more appropriate with traffic-adaptive window sizing. [See Doc 144r2.] Problem As written in the draft, the calculation is not as simple as possible. Rationale for change A simpler computation can achieve the same result.

doc.: IEEE /243r2 Submission May 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 13 Corrections Needed in Clause Modify text as follows: (To compute the new CW[i] value, denoted CWnew[i], from the old CW[i] value, denoted CWold[i] ) In the event of a collision, an EDCF station shall choose a value of CW[i] that is set to the convenient resolution greater than or equal to CWnew[i], which is computed from the old CWnew[i], denoted CWold [i ] (CWnew [i] which meets) according to the following criterion: CWnew[i] (>=) = ((CWold[i]+1)*PF)– 1 Where the persistence factor, PF, is computed using the following procedure: The WPFactor[i] (Contention Window Persistence Factor)corresponding to each queue[i] is distributed in the EDCF parameter set element described in Each CWPFactor[i] field is one octet in length and indicates a scaling factor in units of 1/16 ths. PF is CWPFactor[i] divided by 16 (and optionally rounded up to the nearest convenient fractional resolution). ______________________ Changes to existing text in current draft are shown underlined and in red for additions and (italicized in blue and in parentheses) for deletions.

doc.: IEEE /243r2 Submission May 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 14 Global setting of MSDULifetime[i] values Clause QoS Parameter Set Element (P 45, L 15) Background The MSDULifetime[TC] is used in to discard aged MSDUs that are obsolete because of excessive delay. It specifies the maximum time allowed to transmit an MSDU for a traffic category TC, once it enters the MAC. This provides a quick and simple mechanism for reduction of contention for the medium by clearing the obsolete packets before transmission is attempted. Problem As written In the present draft, the MSDULifetime[TC] values are set in the MIB, independently of all other class-differentiating parameters, which can be updated by the AP. Furthermore, these values may alter the Tspec specified value of TxLifetime of a TC that has a Tspec. Rationale for change The change is necessary in order to enable the AP to provide a consistent specification of all the class-differentiating parameters, and, when a TC has a Tspec, to give precedence to the TxLifetime from the Tspec.

doc.: IEEE /243r2 Submission May 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 15 Corrections Needed in Clause Create a new element, known as the QoS Traffic Class Parameters element. This element is added to the allowable elements of (Re)Association Response and as the frame body of a new QoS Management Action Request, known as Set QoS Traffic Class Parameters Request. Move the AIFS[TC] values field and CWPFactor[TC] values field from the QoS Parameter Set element into this new element and add a new field, known as the aMSDULifetime[TC] field, which can be used by the AP to update the MIB value of MSDULifetime[TC]. If a TC has a Tspec which specifies an alternate TxLifetime, the value from the TSpec takes precedence over aMSDULifetime.

doc.: IEEE /243r2 Submission May 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 16 Corrections Needed in Clause P 64, L 6 (Needed for completeness.) Insert text: In an EDCF STA an RTS is retried when unsuccessful until the associated MSDU timer exceeds the aMSDULifetime [i] for traffic category of the associated MSDU.

doc.: IEEE /243r2 Submission May 2001 Mathilde Benveniste, AT&T Labs - ResearchSlide 17 Corrections Needed in Clause (Cont.) P 64, L 21 (Needed for completeness.) Insert text: An EDCF STA, after transmitting a frame that requires acknowledgment, shall perform the ACK procedure, as defined in All retransmission attempts for an MSDU or MMPDU that has failed the ACK procedure one or more times shall be made with the Retry field set to 1 in the Data or Management type frame. Retries for failed transmission attempts shall continue until the associated MSDU timer exceeds the aMSDULifetime [i] for its traffic category.