MAC Considerations for Mesh

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Doc.: IEEE /481r3 Submission May 2004 Lily Yang, Steve Shellhammer, IntelSlide 1 Thoughts on AP Functional Descriptions L. Lily Yang Steve Shellhammer.
Advertisements

Submission doc.: IEEE /1409r0 November 2013 Adriana Flores, Rice UniversitySlide 1 Dual Wi-Fi: Dual Channel Wi-Fi for Congested WLANs with Asymmetric.
Achieving Quality of Service in Wireless Networks A simulation comparison of MAC layer protocols. CS444N Presentation By: Priyank Garg Rushabh Doshi.
IEEE e QoS on WLANs Speaker : Min-Hua Yang Advisor : Ho-Ting Wu Date: 10/25/05.
802.11g & e Presenter : Milk. Outline g  Overview of g  g & b co-exist QoS Limitations of e  Overview of.
Providing QoS in Ad Hoc Networks with Distributed Resource Reservation IEEE802.11e and extensions Ulf Körner and Ali Hamidian.
Claudio Cicconetti, Luciano Lenzini, Enzo Mingozzi, Giovanni Stea Dipartimento di Ingegneria dell'Informazione University of Pisa, Italy IPS-MoMe 2005.
1 Medium Access Control Enhancements for Quality of Service IEEE Std e TM November 2005.
IEEE WLAN.
Doc.: IEEE 11-04/0319r0 Submission March 2004 W. Steven Conner, Intel Corporation Slide 1 Architectural Considerations and Requirements for ESS.
Planning and Analyzing Wireless LAN
Improving the scalability of MAC protocols in Wireless Mesh Networks Mthulisi Velempini (Mr.)
Performance Characterization of Voice over Wireless LANs Lionel PEREZ August 3rd, 2005.
Copyright © 2003 OPNET Technologies, Inc. Confidential, not for distribution to third parties. Wireless LANs Session
CS440 Computer Networks 1 Wireless LAN (IEEE ) Neil Tang 10/01/2008.
5/12/2005doc.: IEEE /0334 Submission Ripple: A Distributed Medium Access Protocol for Wireless Mesh Network Presented at the IEEE802.11, ,
姓名:劉柏廷 系所:國立中正大學 電機所網路通訊組
Overlapping BSS Proposed Solution – “OSQAP”
EA C451 (Internetworking Technologies)
IEEE e Performance Evaluation
AST San Jose Lab: IEEE s Mesh Network
Wireless Mesh Networks
Multi-channel, multi-radio wireless networks
Mesh Relevance in CAPWAP and AP Functional Descriptions
Intel Validation of TGn Simulation Scenarios
QoS Handling of Trigger Frame
IEEE : Wireless LANs ALOHA, Slotted ALOHA
TDMA for Eliminating Hidden Station Effect in Dense Networks
Performance of an Home Network Mesh Testbed
Consideration on Interference Management in OBSS
Provision of Multimedia Services in based Networks
Speaker:Fu-Yuan Chuang Advisor:Ho-Ting Wu Date:
Mesh Relevance in CAPWAP and AP Functional Descriptions
An extension of IEEE e QoS for MESH Networks
Mesh Relevance in CAPWAP and AP Functional Descriptions
Consideration on Interference Management in OBSS
Is for “Wireless Fidelity” Or IEEE Standard By Greg Goldman
Mesh Media Access Coordination Ad Hoc Group Report Out
QoS STA function applied to Mesh STA
Consideration on Interference Management in OBSS
Thoughts on AP Functional Descriptions
802.11ba Architecture Discussion
WLAN Architectural Considerations for IETF CAPWAP
QoS mechanisms in IEEE 802 Bin Zhen, Huan-band Li and Ryuji Kohno
Limitation of EDCA/HCCA for Video Transmission
Overlapping BSS Proposed Solution – “OSQAP”
Mesh Media Access Coordination Ad Hoc Group Report Out
WLAN Architectural Considerations for IETF CAPWAP
Limitation of EDCA/HCCA for Video Transmission
DL MU MIMO Error Handling and Simulation Results
Student : Min-Hua Yang Advisor : Ho-Ting Wu Date :
TDMA for Eliminating Hidden Station Effect in Dense Networks
Suggested Clarification of s ESS Mesh Terminology
VTS Robust Multicast/Broadcast Protocol
Should Parameterized QoS be Optional
Performance Implications of DCF to ESS Mesh Networks
Performance Implications of DCF to ESS Mesh Networks
Response to Coexistence Presentations
Outdoor Mesh MAC Protocol Issues & Considerations
Requirements and Implementations for Intra-flow/Intra-AC DiffServ
Suggested Major Functional Components for s
Performance Implications of DCF to ESS Mesh Networks
Intel Validation of TGn Simulation Scenarios
OBSS Requirements Date: Authors: July 2008 July 2008
19, Yangjae-daero 11gil, Seocho-gu, Seoul , Korea
Basic TGad MAC Layer Proposals and Options for Coexistence
Should Parameterized QoS be Optional
OBSS Requirements Date: Authors: July 2008 July 2008
MAC Considerations for Mesh
Multi hop connections using
Presentation transcript:

MAC Considerations for Mesh July 2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-04/760r1 July 2004 MAC Considerations for Mesh L. Lily Yang (Intel Corp.) Akira Yamada (NTT DoCoMo) lily.l.yang@intel.com yamadaakir@nttdocomo.co.jp Lily Yang, Akira Yamada Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

Overview Existing 802.11 MAC Architecture 11s MAC Considerations: July 2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-04/760r1 July 2004 Overview Existing 802.11 MAC Architecture Preliminary Analysis on 11e for 11s 11s MAC Considerations: Level of QoS Support Examples of Mesh Specific MAC issues Practical Considerations Possible MAC Architecture Alternatives for 11s Summary and Call to actions Lily Yang, Akira Yamada Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

Context: Major Functional Components for 802.11s Mesh Points * July 2004 Context: Major Functional Components for 802.11s Mesh Points * Configuration/ Management Internetworking Interfaces IEEE802.11s Amendment .11s Mesh Network Measurement Layer 2 Mesh Routing and Forwarding .11s Mesh Security MAC/MLME enhancement for .11s Mesh IEEE802.11 MAC IEEE802.11 PHY IEEE802.11 a/b/g/j/n *[1] slide#3 Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

Existing 802.11 MAC Architecture Overview July 2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-04/760r1 July 2004 Existing 802.11 MAC Architecture Overview Point Coordination Function (PCF: optional) HCF Controlled Access (HCCA) HCF Contention Access (EDCA) 11n MAC Enhancement (based on 11e?) MAC Distributed Coordination Function (DCF) In a non-QoS STA, HCF is not present. In a QSTA implementation, both DCF and HCF are present. PCF is optional in all STAs. PCF is required for contention-free services for non-QoS STA. EDCA (enhanced distributed channel access) is required for prioritized QoS services. HCCA (HCF controlled channel access) is required for parameterized QoS services. 11a/11b/11g/11j PHY 11n PHY * Based on 802 11e D8.0 Clause 9.1, Figure 47 Lily Yang, Akira Yamada Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

11e Components and Their Relevance to 11s July 2004 11e Components and Their Relevance to 11s EDCA Prioritized QoS support and performance enhancement Important to 11s HCCA Parameterized QoS support, need HC Not directly applicable in mesh Block Ack Performance optimization, optional for QSTAs Useful but not essential to mesh DLP and APSD Optimization for QSTAs Orthogonal to mesh APSD Block Ack EDCA HCCA DLP *courtesy of Duncan Kitchin Most Relevant Component to Mesh Points: EDCA Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

EDCA: Important Enhancements over DCF July 2004 EDCA: Important Enhancements over DCF Prioritized QoS support by separate Channel Access Functions for four ACs Separate QoS parameters: CWmin, CWmax, TXOP duration, AIFSN Provide differentiated services Optional: admission control (by QAP) Performance enhancement over basic 11 MAC (e.g., TXOP) Reduce channel access overhead Fix “slow client” problem Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

EDCA: Not Sufficient for 11s July 2004 EDCA: Not Sufficient for 11s Designed for QBSS: Assume one hop traffics between QAPQSTA Assume QAP responsible for QSTA settings: BSS QoS parameters are set by QAP how to apply that to mesh points? Admission control administered by QAP NOT designed for WLAN Mesh (infrastructure network of Mesh Points)! None of the Mesh Point has complete visibility into the whole WLAN Mesh => Really need distributed coordination between mesh points Not designed for multi-hop: issues like hidden/exposed terminals worsen the performance No end-to-end considerations at all: cause network inefficiency. Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

MAC Considerations (1): QoS Support July 2004 MAC Considerations (1): QoS Support From Usage Models: Multi-media applications requires QoS support But we need to carefully determine the type of QoS support for 11s: Is prioritized QoS sufficient? EDCA can help. Do we need parameterized QoS support like what HCCA provides? HCCA not directly applicable due to distributed nature of mesh Much harder problem The level of QoS support required will have great impact on the 11s standard completion time Need to determine the level of QoS support in 11s Functional Requirements Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

MAC Considerations (2): Mesh Specific Issues July 2004 MAC Considerations (2): Mesh Specific Issues Fundamentally different network assumptions from 11/e/n: Distributed data plane: peer-to-peer (no Coordinator) Multi-hop & end-to-end aspects Much more complicated traffic pattern in the network than the “star” pattern traffic in the BSS Mesh points are used to build infrastructure network: Mesh Point can be co-located with AP or application end points A mixture of traffic: from own BSS (or own applications), and from WDS Example of mesh specific issues that are NOT addressed in 11, 11e or 11n: Hidden/exposed nodes Lack of flow control in congested network No prioritization consideration between source traffic and relay traffic Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

Hidden Node and Exposed Node Problem * July 2004 Hidden Node and Exposed Node Problem * Expected to be more common and profound in mesh and hence have more severe negative impact on performance Virtual carrier sensing by RTS/CTS: is supposed to solve this problem, but not really effective, esp. for mesh Main consequence: NAV is not set correctly Collision becomes severe (hidden nodes) Waste wireless bandwidth (exposed nodes) * See [2] and other literature for more details. Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

Hidden Nodes: Example AP1 AP2 AP3 AP4 AP1 AP2 AP3 AP4 AP1 AP2 AP3 AP4 July 2004 Hidden Nodes: Example AP1 AP2 AP3 AP4 Case (a) Case (c) AP1 AP2 AP3 AP4 Case (b) Case (d) Case (b) AP1 AP2 AP3 AP4 Case (a) Case (c) AP1 AP2 AP3 AP4 Case (d) Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

Lack of Flow Control: Example July 2004 Lack of Flow Control: Example Individual flow throughput (b/s) N0 N4 N1 N2 N3 Flow 1 Flow 2 Load (mb/s) Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

Lack of Flow Control: Example (cont.) July 2004 Lack of Flow Control: Example (cont.) Actual Scheduling Result when load=700kb/s e2e throughput 674k 449k 355k 235k Congested nodes 238k 347k 450k 697k Rx: 238k 1020k 899k 1056k 235k Tx: 674k 687k 702k 685k 697k Wasted TX Ideal Scheduling, when the network is overloaded 430k 430k 430k 430k 430k 430k 430k 430k e2e throughput Rx: 430k 860k 860k 860k 860k Tx: 430k 860k 860k 860k 430k Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

Traffic Delivery Prioritization July 2004 Traffic Delivery Prioritization Relay traffic Mesh AP STA N4 N0 N1 N2 N3 BSS traffic When Mesh Point co-located with AP on one RF interface: How to coordinate the relay traffic for mesh point and the BSS traffic for AP? Does it make sense to prioritize the traffic streams depends on type of traffic (relay vs source), how far they’ve traveled, Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

MAC Considerations (3): Practical Matters July 2004 MAC Considerations (3): Practical Matters Best if compatible with existing 802.11 MAC architecture (DCF, EDCA etc.) Hard to adopt if completely different MAC Simplicity & low cost are always desirable Encourage implementation flexibility Mesh AP Two radio interfaces (one for AP, one for Mesh Point) Same radio interface for both AP and Mesh Point Mesh Point being application end points (clients) Mesh Point only as relay We want to get the standard out in a reasonable time frame Address the most important requirements first: Good enough TGs need to specify such a prioritized list in its functional requirements for MAC Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

MAC Considerations (4): Architectural Alternatives July 2004 MAC Considerations (4): Architectural Alternatives Point Coordination Function (PCF: optional) HCF Controlled Access (HCCA) HCF Contention Access (EDCA) Mesh Coordination Function 11n MAC MAC Distributed Coordination Function (DCF) 11a/11b/11g/11j PHY 11n PHY Option#1: Mesh Coordination Function builds on top of DCF, independent of 11e Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

MAC Considerations (4): Architectural Alternatives (cont.) July 2004 MAC Considerations (4): Architectural Alternatives (cont.) Point Coordination Function (PCF: optional) HCF Controlled Access (HCCA) Mesh Coordination Function 11n MAC MAC EDCA Distributed Coordination Function (DCF) 11a/11b/11g/11j PHY 11n PHY Option#2: Mesh Coordination Function builds on top of EDCA (could still enhance DCF as well) Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

MAC Considerations (4): Architectural Alternatives July 2004 MAC Considerations (4): Architectural Alternatives Point Coordination Function (PCF: optional) HCF Controlled Access (HCCA) HCF Contention Access (EDCA) Mesh Coordination Function 11n MAC MAC Distributed Coordination Function (DCF) 11a/11b/11g/11j PHY 11n PHY Option#3: Mesh Coordination Function independent of DCF (very different MAC) Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

July 2004 Summary Only a very preliminary analysis on 11e and its implications to 11s Clearly there are MAC performance issues beyond multi-hop routing that 11s must address Lets start discussing MAC issues and agree on functional requirements Ad Hoc Group? Focus on problems and requirements, not solutions (yet) Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

July 2004 doc.: IEEE 802.11-04/760r1 July 2004 References [1] 11-04-0749-00-000s-suggested-major-functional-components-802-11s.ppt [2] 11-04-0732-01-000s-outdoor-802-11-mesh-mac-protocol-issues-and-considerations.ppt Lily Yang, Akira Yamada Lily Yang, Akira Yamada

July 2004 Thank you Send me email if you are interested in ad hoc group discussion on MAC issues: lily.l.yang@intel.com Lily Yang, Akira Yamada