Doc.: IEEE 802.11-13/0503-00 Submission March 2013 Juho Pirskanen, Renesas Mobile CorporationSlide 1 Discussion On Basic Technical Aspects for HEW Date:

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0xxx March 2014 Giwon Park, LG ElectronicsSlide 1 Discussion on power save mode for real time traffic Date: Authors:
Advertisements

Doc.: IEEE /1515r0 Submission November 2011 Timo Koskela, Renesas Mobile CorporationSlide ah Wi-Fi Offloading Considerations Date:
Doc.: IEEE /0871r0 Submission Jul 2013 Timo Koskela, Renesas Mobile CorporationSlide 1 Discussion on Potential Techniques for HEW Date:
Doc.: IEEE /0604r1 Submission May 2014 Slide 1 Modeling and Evaluating Variable Bit rate Video Steaming for ax Date: Authors:
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/1426r1 November 2014 Gustav Wikström et al., EricssonSlide 1 DSC and legacy coexistence Date: Authors:
Submission doc.: IEEE /0383r0 Impact of number of sub-channels in OFDMA Date: Slide 1Leif Wilhelmsson, Ericsson March 2015 Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0068r0 SubmissionSlide 1Young Hoon Kwon, NEWRACOM January 2015 Support of Outdoor Environments Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0861r0 SubmissionSayantan Choudhury Impact of CCA adaptation on spatial reuse in dense residential scenario Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /1167r2 Sept 2014 SubmissionYonggang Fang et. al. (ZTE) TGax Functional Requirement Discussion Date: Slide 1 Authors: NameAffiliationAddress .
Discussion on OFDMA in IEEE ax
Submission doc.: IEEE /1452r0 November 2014 Leif Wilhelmsson, EricssonSlide 1 Frequency selective scheduling in OFDMA Date: Authors:
Submission doc.: IEEE /1454r0 November 2014 Jarkko Kneckt (Nokia)Slide ax Power Save Discussion Date: Authors:
Submission doc.: IEEE /0623r1 May 2015 Guido R. Hiertz, Ericsson et al.Slide 1 TGax simulation scenario “Box 5” – calibration results Date:
Doc.: IEEE /0728r1 SubmissionSlide 1 Network Optimization for Expected HEW Traffic Patterns Date: Authors: W.Carney, K.Agardh, H.Suzuki.
Doc.: IEEE /0107 Jan 2014 SubmissionYonggang Fang et. al. (ZTE) HEW Evaluation Metrics Date: Slide 1 Authors: NameAffiliationAddress .
Doc.: IEEE /1126r0 Submission September 2012 Krishna Sayana, SamsungSlide 1 Wi-Fi for Hotspot Deployments and Cellular Offload Date:
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0026r1 January 2014 Yong Liu, et al.Slide 1 Thoughts on HEW PAR Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0787r0 Submission July 2013 Wu TianyuSlide 1 Follow-up Discussions on HEW Functional Requirements Date: Authors:
Doc. No. IEEE hew-r1 Submission July 2013 Klaus Doppler, NokiaSlide 1 Evaluation Criteria and Simulation Scenarios Date: July 16, 2013 Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /1153r0 Submission September 2013 Laurent Cariou (Orange)Slide 1 Simulation scenario proposal Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /1305r0 Submission W.Carney, et. al. (SONY) Slide 1 Simplification of HEW Traffic Model Simulations Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0486r1 Submission May 2013 Ron Porat, Broadcom HEW- Metrics, Targets, Simulation Scenarios Date: Authors: Slide 1.
Doc.: IEEE / Submission March 2013 Juho Pirskanen, Renesas Mobile CorporationSlide 1 On Future Enhancements to Technology Date:
Submission doc.: IEEE /0868r0 July 2015 Hakan Persson, Ericsson ABSlide 1 Impact of Frequency Selective Scheduling Feedback for OFDMA Date:
Doc.: IEEE /0214r0 Submission February 2014 Perahia, Cariou, Cho, Inoue, Liu and TaoriSlide 1 High Efficiency WLAN Overview Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /1081r0 SubmissionSayantan Choudhury HEW Simulation Methodology Date: Sep 16, 2013 Authors: Slide 1.
Doc.: IEEE /0214r1 Submission February 2014 Perahia, Cariou, Cho, Inoue, Liu and TaoriSlide 1 High Efficiency WLAN Overview Date: Authors:
Submission Sep doc.: IEEE XXXXr1 Zhigang Wen,et. al (BUPT)Slide 1 Discussion on Massive MIMO for HEW Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0795r0 Submission HEW Usage Scenarios Categorization July 2013 Eldad Perahia (Intel)Slide 1 Date: Authors:
July 2013 Jinsoo Choi, LG ElectronicsSlide 1 Functional Requirements in HEW Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0648r0 Submission May 2014 Chinghwa Yu et. al., MediaTekSlide 1 Performance Observation of a Dense Campus Network Date:
Doc.: IEEE /0878r0 Submission July 2012 Timo Koskela, Renesas Mobile CorporationSlide 1 On the Channel Switching in ah Date:
Doc.: IEEE /0065r0 Submission January 2014 William Carney, SONYSlide 1 Comments on Draft HEW PAR Date: Authors:
Doc.: ax Submission July 2014 Slide 1 Proposed Calibration For MAC simulator Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0786r0 Submission July 2013 Wu TianyuSlide 1 Discussions on System Level Simulation Methodology Date: Authors:
Sep 2013 Jinsoo Choi, LG ElectronicsSlide 1 Discussion on HEW Functional Requirements Date: Authors:
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-13/1395r2 Simultaneous Transmission Technologies for HEW Date: November 2013 Koichi Ishihara, NTTSlide 1.
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-13/1398r0 Nov 2013 Akira Yamada, NTT DOCOMO, Inc.Slide 1 Requirements for HEW Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0383r0 Submission Considerations on evaluation methodology for candidate HEW PHY&MAC techniques Date: March 2014 Le Liu, et.
Doc.:IEEE /0821r3 Submission July 2008 Minho Cheong, ETRISlide 1 Some Ambiguities about Throughput Conditions in PAR Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /374r0 Submission March 2012 Anna Pantelidou, Renesas Mobile CorporationSlide 1 Grouping For.11ah Networks Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0542r0 SubmissionSimone Merlin, QualcommSlide 1 HEW Scenarios and Goals Date: Authors: May 2013.
Submission doc.: IEEE /0835r2 July 2014 Joe Kwak, InterDigitalSlide 1 Functional Requirements Discussion Date: Authors:
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0866r0 July 2014 Johan Söder, Ericsson ABSlide 1 Traffic modeling and system capacity performance measure Date:
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-13/1401r0 Nov Josiam, Kuo, Taori et.al., SamsungSlide 1 System Level Assessments for Outdoor HEW Deployments Date: YYYY-MM-DD.
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-13/1079r0 September 2013 Joseph Levy, InterDigital Communications Inc.Slide 1 Outdoor Stadium Simulation Details Discussion Date:
Discussion on ax functional requirements
Doc.: IEEE /1263r2 Submission Dec 2009 Z. Chen, C. Zhu et al [Preliminary Simulation Results on Power Saving] Date: Authors: Slide.
Doc.: IEEE / Submission July 2013 Juho Pirskanen, Renesas Mobile CorporationSlide 1 Potential approach to improve WLAN BSS edge performance.
Partially Overlapped Channels Not Considered Harmful Arunesh Mishra, Vivek Shrivastava, Suman Banerjee, William Arbaugh (ACM SIGMetrics 2006) Slides adapted.
Doc.: IEEE /1054 Sept 2013 SubmissionYonggang Fang, ZTETX HEW Evaluation Metrics Suggestions Date: Slide 1 Authors: NameAffiliationAddress .
Submission doc.: IEEE /1359r0 November 2015 Yu Wang, Ericsson et al.Slide 1 System Performance Evaluation of ae Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /1366r3 Submission November 2013 Laurent Cariou (Orange)Slide 1 Some propositions to progress towards the PAR definition Date: 2013-xx-11Authors:
Dense apartment building use case for HEW
Proposed basis for PAR discussion
Requirements Discussion
HEW Evaluation Metrics Suggestions
Comparisons of Simultaneous Downlink Transmissions
[Preliminary Simulation Results on Power Saving]
Some propositions to progress towards the PAR definition
[Preliminary Simulation Results on Power Saving]
Some propositions to progress towards the PAR definition
TGax Functional Requirement Discussion
TGax Functional Requirement Discussion
WLAN network behavior under heavy load
Some propositions to progress towards the PAR definition
System Level Simulation Results of Full Duplex Transmission
Discussion on IMT-2020 mMTC and URLLC
Proposed basis for PAR discussion
doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0 Date: September, 2019
Presentation transcript:

doc.: IEEE / Submission March 2013 Juho Pirskanen, Renesas Mobile CorporationSlide 1 Discussion On Basic Technical Aspects for HEW Date: Authors:

doc.: IEEE / Submission Abstract This presentation discusses our views on some basic technical aspects for HEW Study group. Covered aspects are: –Uses Cases –Traffic models –Deployment scenarios –Metrics –Other issues Slide 2Juho Pirskanen, Renesas Mobile Corporation March 2013

doc.: IEEE / Submission WLAN has been used under many different use cases. Contemporary applications give rise to use cases, involving high network load and services requiring low latencies. –HEW SG should concentrate on those use cases. Different usage models were presented in [1]. –Majority of the services are using TCP IP. –Latency and Packet error rate requirements are quite similar: 20-50ms, 1e-3 - 1e-8. –Services are always Bi-directional in practice. Achieved throughput over TCP is highly dependent on available bandwidth and end-to-end latency. –Latency and Jitter has significant negative impact achieved bitrate. –HEW SG should assume that latency in networks beyond networks is low and decreasing in future. If system capacity and latency are sufficient to provide high throughput data services, also voice services will work well –Voice capacity enhancements will come as side product – voice capacity is not an essential target for HEW. Use Cases for HEW March 2013 Juho Pirskanen, Renesas Mobile CorporationSlide 3

doc.: IEEE / Submission To obtain realistic results with high number of STAs. –Traffic should be finite buffer (burst) and a single connection should not be overloading the system. –System should be highly loaded as total. Generic TCP/IP based traffic is a good starting point as used widely by different services. –Simplified model could be considered Both uplink and downlink should be considered simultaneously with different traffic split. –Same spectrum resource shared between DL and UL. –Services are bi-directional due to TCP - performance is degraded if either direction is not performing sufficiently well. –Focus on DL biased traffic split. March 2013 Juho Pirskanen, Renesas Mobile CorporationSlide 4 Simplify Traffic Models

doc.: IEEE / Submission High density multi-floor office building –Presenting a deployment where coordination between APs is possible by network management system. High density multi-floor apartment building –Presenting a deployment where coordination between APs is not necessarily possible by network management system. Stadium or market place –Public outdoor hotspot. Each deployment OBSS issues must be considered. Reasonable AP and STA placement –APs are not located random manner. STAs are connected to the best AP from radio link quality point of view. –All APs should be accessible for STAs. In all scenarios we should assume single frequency network problem as frequency reuse will happen. –if we improve single frequency operation those improvements will work when more frequencies are available. –Simplifies analysis and comparison. March 2013 Juho Pirskanen, Renesas Mobile CorporationSlide 5 Deployments with high density

doc.: IEEE / Submission Robustness of the connection is essential for high user experience. –Always when connected obtain certain “minimum bitrate”. –OBSS – or high interference level are not excuses for the end-user. Better block than drop –User experience is worst if connection works for a small duration but then goes down – especially if user is not moving. For all services minimum bitrate is needed –even best effort WEB-surfing cannot tolerate long delays. Typical evaluation criteria is 5 percentile point on: –Average throughput over simulation rounds above MAC layer –Average latency over simulation rounds above MAC layer Metrics: Robustness March 2013 Juho Pirskanen, Renesas Mobile CorporationSlide 6

doc.: IEEE / Submission Spectral efficiency can be simply maximized by only serving the best STA –This is clearly not the target of HEW. Therefore distributions on how resources are used and achieved data rate are essential. –95 percentile together with 5 percentile (robustness). Averaged over simulation rounds –PF-scheduler in AP for DL data. Maximum queuing time needs to be fixed. –Packets are dropped due to extensive delays. Different solutions can benefit differently on used deployments and how coverage is defined –Bits/s/Hz/m^2 over full coverage area to present total system capacity. –Outage criteria needs be defined and taken into account. Metrics: Spectral Efficiency March 2013 Juho Pirskanen, Renesas Mobile CorporationSlide 7

doc.: IEEE / Submission Supported Frequency bands –2.4GHz and 5GHz, Other? Backward Compatibility –Similar as with.11ac. –More relaxed with some impact to older generations? –Performance in mixed deployments. Baseline system capabilities to which comparison is done –802.11n for 2.4Ghz –802.11ac for 5GHz Other Issues to be discussed March 2013 Juho Pirskanen, Renesas Mobile CorporationSlide 8

doc.: IEEE / Submission In this contribution we discussed several basic technical issues that should be addressed during HEW SG work. It was discussed that several simplifications can be made from analysis point of view in –Uses Cases –Traffic models –Deployment scenarios From metrics both 5 and 95 percentile distribution point are needed to address robustness and overall system capacity. –Packets are dropped due to extensive delays –bits/s/Hz/m^2 over full coverage area to present total system capacity Additionally we need to address –Supported frequency bands –Backward compatibility –Baseline system capability March 2013 Juho Pirskanen, Renesas Mobile CorporationSlide 9 Conclusion

doc.: IEEE / Submission [1] Usage Models for Next Generation Wi-Fi; Osama Aboul-Magd, et. al. References March 2013 Juho Pirskanen, Renesas Mobile CorporationSlide 10