Channel Access Efficiency

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Doc.: IEEE /0059r1 January 2015 Sigurd SchelstraeteSlide 1 Uplink RTS/CTS Control Date: Authors:
Advertisements

Doc.: IEEE /0591r1 May 2016 SubmissionPatrice NEZOU et al., Canon Issues related to OCW management Date: Slide 1 Authors: NameAffiliationAddress .
Submission doc.: IEEE /0674r0 May 2016 Hanseul Hong, Yonsei UniversitySlide 1 EIFS excess problem of Acknowledgement for UL MU procedure Date:
OFDMA performance in 11ax
Supporting Authentication/Association for Large Number of Stations
Supporting Authentication/Association for Large Number of Stations
MU BAR Frame Format Date: Authors: November 2015 Month Year
Resource Negotiation for Unassociated STAs in MU Operation
UL OFDMA Random Access Control
AP access procedure for UL MU operation
TDMA for Eliminating Hidden Station Effect in Dense Networks
Random Access RU Allocation in the Trigger Frame
Random Access RU Allocation in the Trigger Frame
Considerations for WUR Response
Wi-Fi Time Sensitive Networking
WUR Acknowledgement Indication
WUR Acknowledgement Indication
Results for Beacon Collisions
Traffic priority for random Multi User Uplink OFDMA
July 2015 Calibration Results for PSP and U-APSD for 20MHz, 40MHz and 80 MHz band Date: Authors: Name Affiliations Address Phone Dmitry.
Issue of Buffer Status reporting
Channel Access Efficiency
Considerations on Trigger Frame for Random Access Procedure
Issues related to OCW management
11az STA Polling for MU NDP Ranging
MAC Calibration Results
Resource Negotiation for Unassociated STAs in MU Operation
Results for Beacon Collisions
MAC Clarifications Date: Authors: September 2016
Non-orthogonal Multiple Channel Access in Wi-Fi
Wake Up Response mode to WUR frame
Performance evaluation of Real Time Communication over Wi-Fi
Random Access RU Allocation in the Trigger Frame
11az STA Polling for MU NDP Ranging
Non-orthogonal Multiple Channel Access in Wi-Fi
Discussion on CR for CID 5066
Discussion on Group ID Structure
Overlapping IEEE ah Networks of Different Types
Random Access RU Allocation in the Trigger Frame
Performance evaluation of Real Time Communication over Wi-Fi
WUR MAC and Wakeup Frame
WUR Acknowledgement Indication
Further Consideration for WUR Acknowledgement Indication
Reducing Overhead in Active Scanning with Simulation Results
Performance evaluation of Real Time Communication over Wi-Fi
Regarding buffer status of UL-STAs in UL-OFDMA
Considerations for WUR Response
Performance evaluation of Real Time Communications over Wi-Fi
DL MU MIMO Error Handling and Simulation Results
TDMA for Eliminating Hidden Station Effect in Dense Networks
Reducing Overhead in Active Scanning with Simulation Results
Performance evaluation of Real Time Communications over Wi-Fi
Channel Access Efficiency
UL MU Random Access Analysis
PS-Poll TXOP Date: Authors: Month Year
Random Access UL MU Resource Allocation and Indication
OFDMA performance in 11ax
Overlapping IEEE ah Networks of Different Types
Supporting Authentication/Association for Large Number of Stations
TD Control field with Response indication in WUR frame
Congestion control for UL MU random access
TGbb MAC Channel Access features proposal
TGbb MAC Channel Access features proposal
WUR MAC and Wakeup Frame
Considerations on Trigger Frame for Random Access Procedure
Further Consideration for WUR Acknowledgement Indication
Month Year doc.: IEEE /1081r0 May, 2016
LC MAC submission – follow up
LC MAC submission – follow up
Latency enhancement for EHT
Presentation transcript:

Channel Access Efficiency Month Year Doc Title May 2016 Channel Access Efficiency Date: 2016-05-16 Authors: Name Affiliation Address Phone Email Evgeny Khorov IITP khorov@frtk.ru Anton Kiryanov   ant456@ya.ru Sigurd Schelstraete Quantenna sigurd@quantenna.com Huizhao Wang hwang@quantenna.com IITP RAS John Doe, Some Company

May 2016 Background Trigger frames can schedule UL RUs for both deterministic and random channel access. To send a Trigger frame, an AP shall contend for the channel with associated STAs and STAs from other BSSs. When the AP wins the contention, it allocates RUs for the STAs. However, when STAs use DCF (or EDCA), collision probability increases. What is the most efficient way to allocate channel resource: DCF (EDCA) or Trigger-based? IITP RAS

in the RX range of each other May 2016 Scenario Description All nodes are in the RX range of each other No hidden STAs AP N STAs We consider 4 channel access methods DCF without RTS/CTS DCF with RTS/CTS Trigger-based Random Access without RTS/CTS Trigger-based Deterministic Access without RTS/CTS In 3 and 4, the STAs can also try to send frames with DCF IITP RAS

Trigger-based Random Access without RTS/CTS May 2016 Trigger-based Random Access without RTS/CTS Trigger for Random Access M-STA BlockACK Trigger for Random Access Data 26 Collision 26 Empty 20 MHz ……………………………………….. 26 Success 26 26 26 20 MHz ……………………………………….. 26 26 26 26 ……………………………………….. 20 MHz 26 26 26 26 ……………………………………….. 20 MHz 26 26 SIFS Collisions and empty RU are possible! SIFS DIFS+ backoff IITP RAS

Trigger-based Deterministic Access without RTS/CTS May 2016 Trigger-based Deterministic Access without RTS/CTS N=37 STAs M-STA BlockACK Trigger Data Trigger 26 20 MHz 26 ……………………………………….. 26 26 26 26 20 MHz ……………………………………….. 26 26 26 26 ……………………………………….. 20 MHz 26 26 26 26 ……………………………………….. 20 MHz 26 26 SIFS No collisions, no empty RUs! SIFS DIFS+ 7 slots IITP RAS

Scenario Parameters May 2016 Parameter Value Channel width 80 MHz Control frame MCS MCS0 Data frame MCS MCS5 (272 Mbps @80 MHz) MSDU size 1500 byte Data frame 1 MSDU 24 MSDUs Traffic mode Saturated IITP RAS

Results (24 MSDUs) May 2016 #RUs = N = OCW RU ~4.5ms * For Trigger Based Deterministic Access the throughput depends on the # RUs. For long frames, Trigger-based Random access provides low performance, while Trigger-based Deterministic access gives the highest throughput IITP RAS

May 2016 Results (1 MSDU) RU ~2ms For short frames, DCF provides the lowest performance because of relatively long headers, etc. Trigger-based Deterministic access shows the best performance. Trigger based Deterministic Access suffers from STAs which use DCF IITP RAS

May 2016 Remarks Since the cumulative UL throughput degrades when STAs use DCF in addition to transmission in allocated RUs, it makes sense to improve efficiency of the channel access by using deterministic Trigger-based channel access instead of random access (DCF and/or Trigger-based Random Access). This restriction should be applied for any frame transmission except for TBD cases (e.g. sending Buffer Status Report, delay sensitive frames, VO frames, management frames, etc). Obviously, the AP should allocate some amount of channel time to the STAs which are limited in use of DCF and Trigger-based RA. IITP RAS

Signaling Channel Access Method May 2016 Signaling Channel Access Method 802.11 defines Action frame formats for wireless network management (WNM) See 8.5.14 in 802.11-2012 or 8.6.14 in P802.11-REVmc/D5.3 WNM Action frame serves a variety of Wireless Network Management purposes WNM Action field values 28-255 currently unused Details: Category = WNM WNM Action = newly defined WNM Action field value Random Access Limits = TBD bitmap describing when random access is limited Category Random Access Limits WNM Action IITP RAS

Straw Poll #1 Do you agree to add the following text in SFD: Month Year Doc Title May 2016 Straw Poll #1 Do you agree to add the following text in SFD: x.y.z Do you support adding a mechanism that allows the AP to individually configure associated STAs not to use random access (DCF, EDCA and Trigger-based RA) for the frames except for TBD cases? Y N A IITP RAS John Doe, Some Company