November, 1999 doc.:IEEE P802.11-99/259 Submission Slide 1 Dr. Rajugopal Gubbi,ShareWave Streaming Support for 802.11b MAC Dr. Rajugopal Gubbi Nov, 1999.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Streaming Video over the Internet
Advertisements

Doc.: IEEE /080r1 Submission January 2001 Jie Liang, Texas InstrumentsSlide 1 Jie Liang Texas Instruments Incorporated TI Blvd. Dallas,
Networking at Home and Abroad
QoS In WLAN By Abdulbaset Hassan Muneer Bazama. Outline Introduction QoS Parameters medium access control schemes (MAC) e medium access.
Network Certification Preparation. Module - 1 Communication methods OSI reference model and layered communication TCP/IP model TCP and UDP IP addressing.
T.Sharon-A.Frank 1 Multimedia Quality of Service (QoS)
Fundamentals of Multimedia Part III: Multimedia Communications and Networking Chapter 15 : Network Services and Protocols for Multimedia Communications.
Achieving Quality of Service in Wireless Networks A simulation comparison of MAC layer protocols. CS444N Presentation By: Priyank Garg Rushabh Doshi.
Doc.: IEEE /1413r1 Submission November 2013 Edward Reuss, UnaffiliatedSlide 1 Real-Time Multicast Streams During Power Save – Part 2 Date:
Presented by Scott Kristjanson CMPT-820 Multimedia Systems Instructor: Dr. Mohamed Hefeeda 1 Cross-Layer Wireless Multimedia.
Presented by Santhi Priya Eda Vinutha Rumale.  Introduction  Approaches  Video Streaming Traffic Model  QOS in WiMAX  Video Traffic Classification.
1 “Multiplexing Live Video Streams & Voice with Data over a High Capacity Packet Switched Wireless Network” Spyros Psychis, Polychronis Koutsakis and Michael.
1 Medium Access Control Enhancements for Quality of Service IEEE Std e TM November 2005.
Overview of IEEE and MAC Layer September 25, 2009 SungHoon Seo
LYU9802 Quality of Service in Wired/Wireless Communication Networks: Techniques and Evaluation Supervisor: Dr. Michael R. Lyu Marker: Dr. W.K. Kan Wan.
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.
Doc.: IEEE /174 Submission July 2000 Carl Temme, Atheros CommunicaitonsSlide 1 5-UP: A 5-GHz Unified Protocol Proposed OFDM Extensions for Supporting.
Saint Petersburg State University of Telecommunications Roman V. Plyaskin Advisor: Prof. Alexander E. Ryzhkov.
Doc.: IEEE /1126r0 Submission September 2012 Krishna Sayana, SamsungSlide 1 Wi-Fi for Hotspot Deployments and Cellular Offload Date:
Voice Traffic Performance over Wireless LAN using the Point Coordination Function Wei Supervisor: Prof. Sven-Gustav Häggman Instructor: Researcher Michael.
Networking Technologies
Wireless LAN Advantages 1. Flexibility 2. Planning 3. Design
CSCI-235 Micro-Computer in Science The Network. © Prentice-Hall, Inc Communications  Communication is the process of sending and receiving messages 
Providing QoS in Ad Hoc Networks with Distributed Resource Reservation IEEE802.11e and extensions Ulf Körner and Ali Hamidian.
Voice over WiFi R 張素熒 R 朱原陞 R 王振宇
1 Pertemuan 16 WAN Technologies Overview. Discussion Topics WAN technology WAN devices WAN standards WAN encapsulation Packet and circuit switching WAN.
Networks and Protocols CE Week 5b. WAN’s, Frame Relay, DSL, Cable.
Copyright © 2002 Intel Corporation. The MAC Protocol & Quality of Service Duncan Kitchin Wireless Networking Group Intel Corporation 4/4/2003.
Voice Capacity analysis over Introducing VoIP and WLans IEEE based Wireless Local Area Networks (WLANs) are becoming popular While WLANs.
Wireless LAN Overview Sunggeun Jin Outline  IEEE MAC  IEEE MAC.
 What is a network and how does it function with computer systems? It is a collection of computers and devices that communicate with one another over.
IEEE &
Doc.: IEEE /137r2 Submission June 2000 Tim Godfrey, IntersilSlide 1 TGe Requirements Version r2 8 June 2000.
WME ABC ’ s LayerDescription aPHY 54 Mb/s in 5 GHz bands bPHY 11 Mb/s direct sequence in 2.4 GHz band cMAC Bridging operation dPHY International.
Distribution of Multimedia Data Over a Wireless Network (DMDoWN): An Introduction Presented By: Rafidah Md Noor Faculty of Computer Science & Information.
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.
March, 2000doc.: IEEE /033r1 Submission Slide 1 R. Gubbi (Sharewave), W. Diepstraten(Lucent ), J. Ho (AT&T) QoS Extensions to MAC Rajugopal.
Doc.:IEEE /0536r0 Submission May 11th, 2009 Slide 1 OBSS issue in ac Authors: Date:
Delay Bound Rich Image Delivery over WLANs Shira S. Krishnan Georgia Tech, ECE Multimedia Communications Laboratory.
Doc.:IEEE /208r1July 2000 Submission Walt Davis, Motorola Slide 1 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs)
November, 1999 doc.: IEEE P /260 PresentationSlide 1 Dr. Rajugopal Gubbi,ShareWave Tutorial: Efficient Scheduling Overlay for b MAC Dr. Rajugopal.
Submission doc.: IEEE /569r1 November 2001 M. Benveniste -- AT&T Labs, ResearchSlide 1 An Access Mechanism for Periodic Contention-Free Sessions.
IEEE WLAN.
1 Merges of Wireless Communications and Computer Networks George Lee.
Sept IEEE P /196 PresentationSlide 1Amar Ghori Dr. Rajugopal Gubbi Multimedia Transport Over Wireless LANs Amar Ghori Dr. Raju Gubbi Sept.
Chapter 15 Wireless LANs 15.# 1
Copyright © 2006 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. McGraw-Hill Technology Education Chapter 7B Data Communications.
1 A Cross-Layer Scheduling Algorithm With QoS Support in Wireless Networks Qingwen Liu, Student Member, IEEE, Xin Wang, Member, IEEE, and Georgios B. Giannakis,
Doc:IEEE /0150r0 Submission May 2000 Carlos Rios, 3Com Proposed Application: Wireless Home Networks.
ATM Yang Wang Professor: Anvari. Definition 1: ATM is a high bandwidth, low-delay, connection-oriented, packet-like switching and multiplexing.
Using in an FTTP Application. FTTP Application.
Doc.:IEEE /0134r0 Submission Laurent Cariou January 18, 2010 Slide 1 Fast session transfer use cases Authors: Date:
Copyright © 2003 OPNET Technologies, Inc. Confidential, not for distribution to third parties. Wireless LANs Session
Doc.: IEEE /286 Submission Sept Sharp Laboratories of America, Inc.Slide 1 A IEEE e Proposal to support efficient MM streaming Srinivas.
Doc.: IEEE /182r0 Submission March 2002 Brüninghaus / Euscher / Kockmann, Siemens.Slide 1 Home Networking Requirements & Aspects for Next Generation.
Wireless LAN Requirements (1) Same as any LAN – High capacity, short distances, full connectivity, broadcast capability Throughput: – efficient use wireless.
WiMAX Chapter 11. Wireless Technologies WWAN (proposed) WMAN 70 Mbps ~50 Km a/e WiMAX New standard for Fixed broadband Wireless. Trying to.
Doc.: IEEE /1032r3 Submission September 2004 Hiroyuki Nakase, Tohoku Univ.Slide 1 Enhanced MAC proposal for high throughput. Tohoku University,
Improved IEEE PCF performance using silence detection and cyclic shift on stations polling E. Ziouva and T. Antonakopoulos IEE Proceedings-Communications,
Medium Access Control. MAC layer covers three functional areas: reliable data delivery access control security.
IEEE e Performance Evaluation
Wireless Mesh Networks
November 18 July 2008 Project: IEEE P Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: Task Group 4e definitions Date.
November 2005 doc.: IEEE November 2005
Department of Computer Science Southern Illinois University Carbondale CS441-Mobile & Wireless Computing IEEE Standard.
SP Spatial Sharing among BSSs: Resolution to CID 143
MAC applicability for WirelessHUMAN
‘Shield’: Protecting High-Priority Channel Access Attempts
Presentation transcript:

November, 1999 doc.:IEEE P /259 Submission Slide 1 Dr. Rajugopal Gubbi,ShareWave Streaming Support for b MAC Dr. Rajugopal Gubbi Nov, 1999

November, 1999 doc.:IEEE P /259 Submission Slide 2 Dr. Rajugopal Gubbi,ShareWave Is Stream Different From (Async) Data? Asynchronous Data Little or no latency restrictions Real-time delivery not an issue All data frames are treated equally Streams Sensitive to latency in delivery Network throughput is an issue as it controls how many streams can be effectively transported at any given time Frames from different streams can NOT be treated equally

November, 1999 doc.:IEEE P /259 Submission Slide 3 Dr. Rajugopal Gubbi,ShareWave What is a Stream? Streams are virtual connections over the data frame based MAC/PHY services. A stream is also a set of frames from one application requiring specific services and a specific range of parameter values for the required services. Some of the examples of the services are; Latency: How often the stream frames are transmitted independent of the network traffic conditions. Bandwidth: How many stream frames are transmitted per second independent of the network traffic conditions. Priority: How important is this stream compared to other traffic on the network Channel protection: How much error correction or retransmission is carried out on the frames of the stream.

November, 1999 doc.:IEEE P /259 Submission Slide 4 Dr. Rajugopal Gubbi,ShareWave Why Streaming? Some sources of streams requiring Qos over B LANs are Cable modem connections DSL connections WAN connections Multimedia data generated inside home CD quality Audio MPEG or other Video streams from camcorders/PCs If all these data are treated equally at B MAC, the effort of these layers to provide QoS will be undone at B MAC

November, 1999 doc.:IEEE P /259 Submission Slide 5 Dr. Rajugopal Gubbi,ShareWave Some Delivery Requirements MPEG needs 4-5Mbps bandwidth for reasonable quality video and can afford latency of about 3 video frames (approx. 100msec). VOIP needs 64Kbps (or less) but has the latency requirements in the order of 10msec. Interactive games could have varying bandwidth requirement depending on the information exchanged but strict latency requirements. Number of retransmissions of a video or voice data frame is limited due to the required large bandwidth and/or the latency involved. Hence need good channel protection. When there are data frames of different types at the same STA, their transmission needs to be prioritized to provide better service to more important data.

November, 1999 doc.:IEEE P /259 Submission Slide 6 Dr. Rajugopal Gubbi,ShareWave Different transmission requirements of different data types demand support for streams Efficiency requires peer-peer communication during CFP Interfacing to broadband needs preservation of Quality of service (Qos) Priority Classes, BW reservation, Bounded Latency Interference in the wireless channel demands better mechanisms to improve the channel throughput Multiple coordinators of different BSSs in a nearby locations need to share channel in an efficient, organized manner Why is Enhancement Required?

November, 1999 doc.:IEEE P /259 Submission Slide 7 Dr. Rajugopal Gubbi,ShareWave Simple support at the MAC level for streams and priority services Collision free channel sharing by multiple overlapping BSSs Reliable access mechanism for Beacon Error correction based on type of stream Demand based retransmissions based in type of stream Channel agility to move over to a better channel from a severe channel What are the Required Enhancements?

November, 1999 doc.:IEEE P /259 Submission Slide 8 Dr. Rajugopal Gubbi,ShareWave YES. They are compatible. There is NO CHANGE to the existing DCF and PCF STAs Beacon, CFP and NAV currently exist in B Access mechanism for Beacon can be overlaid over DCF Error correction can be made available only for streaming More control frames or elements within them can be defined without affecting the compatibility with the existing STAs Are These Enhancements Compatible?

November, 1999 doc.:IEEE P /259 Submission Slide 9 Dr. Rajugopal Gubbi,ShareWave YES, because, Simple stream enhancements to the are possible There are simple but efficient scheduling mechanisms available Low complexity error correction schemes with little bandwidth overhead are available Simple, low complexity selective retransmission mechanism is possible Some form of channel agility is already present in Other required co-ordinations can be achieved by simple control information exchange between the devices based on the demand Are the Enhancements Feasible?