1. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 1 Simulation Results for p-DCF, v-DCF and Legacy DCF Khaled Turki, Jin-Meng Ho, Sid Schrum, Matthew Shoemake and Don Shaver Texas Instruments Inc.

2. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 2 Simulation Environment Simulation platform: OPNET MAC schemes simulated: 1.p-DCF as described in 01/139 2.v-DCF as described in 01/132 and 01/133 3.802.11-1999

3. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 3 Parameters Buffer size = 2 Mbits Packet lifetime = 500 ms PHY = 11 Mbps- DSSS

4. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 4 Scenarios 20 streams 15 STA Bi-directional streams Packet length = 1500 bytes and 250 bytes Packet length distribution : Constant Arrival process : Exponential inter-arrival times

5. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 5 Contention-Based Access: CSMA with Adaptive Contention -- State Transition Diagram ESTA active Medium idle for DIFS or EIFS? Calculate PP Yes Any TCPP changed? Transmission permitted? (X PP?) Transmit a frame Contention continued? Stop Slot idle? Recalculate PP No Yes No Yes No

6. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 6 Scenario 1 Aggregate load 6 Mbps 20 Streams 15 STA 4 Priorities 5 Streams per priority Inter-arrival time exponentially distributed Packet length: Constant 1500 Bytes

7. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 7 Aggregate Offered Load Offered Load (Mbits/sec) 0 2 4 6 8 10 0123456789 Offered Load (Mbits/sec)

8. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 8 v-DCF Results Scenario 1

9. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 9 V-DCF Results For priority differentiation the following three cases are considered 1.CW_min[ 7,15,31,63], QIFS[DIFS] 2.CW_min[31],QIFS [ DIFS+3 slots, DIFS+2 slots, DIFS+1 slot, DIFS] 3.{CW_min[ 7],QIFS [DIFS]},{CW_min[15], QIFS[DIFS+1 slot]} {CW_min[31],QIFS [ DIFS+2 slots]},{CW_min[63], QIFS[DIFS+3 slots]}

10. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 10 v-DCF 1 Unstable TC

11. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 11 v-DCF v-DCF CW differentiation only 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 012345678910 Simulation Time (sec) Average Delay (ms) CW_min=63 CW_min=31 CW_min=15 CW_min=7 Legacy

12. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 12 V-DCF Priorities Priority 0 (lowest):CW_min[31] QIFS [DIFS+3 slots] Priority 1: CW_min[31] QIFS [DIFS+2 slots] Priority 2: CW_min[31] QIFS [DIFS+1slot] Priority 3(highest): CW_min[31] [DIFS]

13. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 13 v-DCF

14. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 14 v-DCF Legacy

15. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 15 V-DCF

16. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 16 v-DCF

17. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 17 p-DCF Results Scenario 1

18. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 18 p-DCF

19. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 19 p-DCF

20. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 20 p-DCF p-DCF- 50 ms probability update interval 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 012345678910 Simulation Time (sec) Delay (ms) TCPP 0 TCPP 1 TCPP 2 TCPP 3 Legacy

21. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 21 p-DCF

22. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 22 Simulation Results p-DCF and v-DCF Scenario 2

23. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 23 Scenario 2 Aggregate load 3 Mbps 20 Streams 15 STA 4 Priorities 5 Streams per priority Inter-arrival time exponentially distributed Packet length: Constant 250 Bytes

24. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 24 Aggregate Offered Load

25. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 25 Simulation Results v-DCF Scenario 2

26. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 26 v-DCF 2 Unstable TCs

27. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 27 v-DCF

28. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 28 Simulation Results p-DCF Scenario 2

29. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 29 p-DCF 1 Unstable TC

30. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 30 p-DCF 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 012345678910 Simulation Time (sec) Average Delay (ms) TCPP 0 TCPP 1 TCPP 2 TCPP 3 Legacy

31. doc.: IEEE 802.11-01/037r1 Submission March 2001 Khaled Turki et. al,Texas InstrumentsSlide 31 Conclusions Several simulations have been performed in order to evaluate the performance of two EDCF proposals (v-DCF and p-DCF) The probabilistic approach (p-DCF)shows performance superiority over v-DCF at higher loads and large STA population. –Delay and delay variance –Dropped frame rate –Stability in terms of frame delay V-DCF achieves differentiation by introducing additional delay among traffic categories (TCs) Starvation effect is also observed in v-DCF