Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT Performance evaluation of MU-RTS under OBSS environment Slide 1.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Improved CCA for 80 and 160 MHz BSSs
Advertisements

Doc.: IEEE /272a Submission June 2001 S. Choi, Philips Research Slide 1 Problems with IEEE (e) NAV Operation and ONAV Proposal Javier del.
Legacy Coexistence – A Better Way?
Doc.: IEEE /0410r2 Submission March 2011 Slide 1 Data Transmission Protection on the IEEE ac MU-MIMO Downlink Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0259r02 Submission Date: ad New Technique Proposal March 2010 Yuichi Morioka, Sony CorporationSlide 1 Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0045r1 Submission Jan 2014 E-Education Analysis HEW SG Date: Authors: Graham Smith, DSP GroupSlide 1.
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0802r0 Consideration on UL MU transmission Date: Slide 1Jinyoung Chun et. al, LG Electronics July 2014 Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /1062r2 Submission Zhendong Luo, CATR September 2010 RF Feasibility of 120 MHz Channelization for China Date: Authors: Slide.
Doc.: IEEE /1355r2 11ah Submission Date: Authors: Nov 2012 James Wang, MediaTek Slide 1.
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0868r0 July 2014 Johan Söder, Ericsson ABSlide 1 UL & DL DSC and TPC MAC simulations Date: Authors:
GroupID Concept for Downlink MU-MIMO Transmission
Doc.: IEEE / hew Submission March 2014 Raja Banerjea, CSRSlide 1 A Simplified Simultaneous Transmit and Receive Mechanism Date:
Submission doc.: IEEE /0859r0 July 2014 Hakan Persson, Ericsson ABSlide 1 Proposing a Stadium Scenario Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0839r0 Submission Slide 1S. Abraham, Qualcomm Inc. July 2010 DL MU-MIMO performance with QoS traffic and OBSS.
Doc.: IEEE /0798r1 Submission July 2008 L. Chu Etc.Slide 1 HT Features in Mesh Network Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0798r3 Submission September 2008 L. Chu Etc.Slide 1 HT Features in Mesh Network Date: Authors:
Interference Cancellation for Downlink MU-MIMO
Doc.: IEEE /0810r0 Submission May 2011 Minho Cheong, ETRISlide 1 Selection of Key Requirement Elements for Baseline FR-EM Document Date:
PS-Poll TXOP Using RTS/CTS Protection
Doc.: IEEE /0324r0 Submission Slide 1Michelle Gong, Intel March 2010 DL MU MIMO Error Handling and Simulation Results Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /0567r0 Submission Slide 1Michelle Gong, Intel May 2010 DL MU MIMO Analysis and OBSS Simulation Results Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /630r4a Submission S. Choi, Philips Research January 2002 Slide 1 HC Recovery and Backoff Rules Sunghyun Choi and Javier del Prado.
Doc.: IEEE /0782r0 Submission July 2010 Daewon Lee, LG ElectronicsSlide 1 STA MU-MIMO Group Management Signaling Design Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /1278r0 Submission BSS load balancing for MU-MIMO Date: Authors: Nov 2010 Slide 1Daewon Lee, LG Electronics.
Doc.: IEEE /0783r0 Submission July 2010 Daewon Lee, LG ElectronicsSlide 1 MU-MIMO support for BSS load balancing Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /1234r0 Submission November 2009 Sameer Vermani, QualcommSlide 1 Interference Cancellation for Downlink MU-MIMO Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /1123r0 Submission September 2010 Zhu/Kim et al 1 Date: Authors: [TXOP Sharing for DL MU-MIMO Support]
Doc.: IEEE /1244r1 Submission Nov.2010 Sun Bo, ZTE CorpSlide 1 Authors: Transmission Mechanism in MU-MIMO Date:
Slide 1 doc.: IEEE /1092r0 Submission Simone Merlin, Qualcomm Incorporated September 2010 Slide 1 ACK Protocol and Backoff Procedure for MU-MIMO.
Doc.: IEEE /0606r1 Submission Uplink Channel Access Date: Authors: May 2012 Minyoung Park, Intel Corp.Slide 1.
Submission doc.: IEEE /0148r0 Nokia Internal Use Only January 2012 Chittabrata Ghosh, Nokia Slide 1 Date: Authors: Uplink Throughput.
Submission doc.: IEEE /1186r2 September 2014 Pengfei Xia, Interdigital CommunicationsSlide 1 Comparisons of Simultaneous Downlink Transmissions.
Discussion on OFDMA in HEW
Doc.: IEEE /1190r2 September 2014 Submission Kaiying Lv (ZTE) Frame Exchange Control for Uplink Multi-user transmission Slide 1 Date:
Discussion on The Receiver Behavior for DSC/CCAC with BSS Color
Doc.: IEEE /1431r1 Submission September 2014 Issues on UL-OFDMA Transmission Date: Authors: Slide 1.
Doc.: IEEE /0861r0 SubmissionSayantan Choudhury Impact of CCA adaptation on spatial reuse in dense residential scenario Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE /1420r1Nov 2014 Submission Po-Kai Huang (Intel) Slide 1 The Impact of Preamble Error on MAC System Performance Date: NameAffiliationsAddressPhone .
Doc.: IEEE /1187r1Sep 2014 Submission Po-Kai Huang (Intel) Slide 1 The Effect of Preamble Error Model on MAC Simulator Date: NameAffiliationsAddressPhone .
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r0 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT Performance evaluation of MU-RTS under OBSS environment Slide 1.
Doc.: IEEE /0831r0 Submission July 2010 Yusuke Asai (NTT)Slide 1 Frame Sequence of Interference Management Using Beamforming Technique in OBSS.
Doc.: IEEE /1081r0 SubmissionSayantan Choudhury HEW Simulation Methodology Date: Sep 16, 2013 Authors: Slide 1.
Doc.:IEEE /0536r0 Submission May 11th, 2009 Slide 1 OBSS issue in ac Authors: Date:
Doc.: IEEE /0068r0 Submission Discussions on the better resource utilization for the next generation WLANs January 2012 Yasuhiko Inoue (NTT),
Submission doc.: IEEE /1289r2 Michelle Gong, IntelSlide 1 RTS/CTS Operation for Wider Bandwidth Date: Authors: Nov
Doc.: IEEE /0161r1 Submission doc.: IEEE /1031r0 Measurement results for OBSS in home network scenarios Date: September 2009.
Submission doc.: IEEE /0615r0 May 2012 Sudheer Grandhi, InterDigital CommunicationsSlide 1 Considerations for early NAV indication Date:
Doc.: IEEE /1086r0 SubmissionSlide 1 Date: Authors: Improved Virtual Carrier Sensing Mechanism for 45GHz Sep ZTE Corp.
Doc.: IEEE /1392r5 SubmissionSuhwook Kim, LG ElectronicsSlide 1 Simulation results for Box 5 calibration Date: Authors: NameAffiliationsAddressPhone .
Submission doc.: IEEE /0108r0 January 11 Slide 1 Evaluation of neighbors impact on channel allocation for dense environment and Video use cases.
Doc.: IEEE /0161r1 Submission doc.: IEEE /1032r0 Slide 1 Simulation Scenario for OBSS in Home Network Date: Authors: September.
Performance evaluation of MU-RTS under OBSS environment
Month Year doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0 May 2010
Performance evaluation of MU-RTS under OBSS environment
Consideration on Interference Management in OBSS
January 2012 Discussions on the better resource utilization for the next generation WLANs Date: January 17th, 2012 Authors: Name Affiliations Address Phone.
System Capacity Evaluation in OBSS Environment at 5 GHz band
Month Year doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0 September 2010
Consideration on Interference Management in OBSS
OBSS issue and simulation scenarios in TGac
Month Year doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0 May 2010
Consideration on Interference Management in OBSS
Month Year doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0 May 2010
The need and complexity of in-home entertainment scenario with OBSS
DL MU MIMO Error Handling and Simulation Results
System Capacity Evaluation in OBSS Environment at 5 GHz band
Strawmodel ac Specification Framework
Error Recovery Scheme for Scheduled Ack
Month Year doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0 May 2010
System Level Simulator Evaluation with/without Capture Effect
Presentation transcript:

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT Performance evaluation of MU-RTS under OBSS environment Slide 1 Date: Authors: NameAffiliationsAddressPhone B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera NTT1-1, Hikarino-oka, Yokosuka- shi, Japan Shoko ShinoharaNTT1-1, Hikarino-oka, Yokosuka- shi, Japan Yusuke AsaiNTT1-1, Hikarino-oka, Yokosuka- shi, Japan Yasuhiko InoueNTT1-1, Hikarino-oka, Yokosuka- shi, Japan Takeo IchikawaNTT1-1, Hikarino-oka, Yokosuka- shi, Japan Masato MizoguchiNTT1-1, Hikarino-oka, Yokosuka- shi, Japan Philippe ChristinOrange lab4, rue du clos courtel Cesson-Sévigné ftgroup.com Laurent CariouOrange lab4, rue du clos courtel Cesson-Sévigné ftgroup.com

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT Slide 2 NameAffiliationsAddressPhone Yuichi MoriokaSony Europe Ltd. Jays Close, Viables, Basingstoke, Hampshire, RG22 4SB, UK +44 (0) Ted R. Booth IIISony Electronics Inc Via Esprillo Building 7, MZ7021 San Diego, CA André BourdouxIMECKapeldreef 75, 3001 Leuven, Belgium

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT Abstract In this document, we first present some results of a statistical analysis of housing conditions in Japan, and show that more than 40% among all dwellings are the apartment houses. Then, we show the numerical results of the number of OBSSs that can be happen in such an apartment environment. Finally, we present simulation results of a simple OBSS scenario, and as an operator, we show the importance of a MAC protection mechanism for TGac. Slide 3

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT Statistical analysis for the number of OBSSs according to “Housing and Land Survey * ” in Japan The Japanese governmental survey shows: –More than 40% houses are apartment houses (about 20 million in all of 49.6 million dwellings). –The average area of floor space per dwelling in apartment house is about 520 ft 2 (= 48 m 2 ). –About 75% apartment houses are made of reinforced steel-framed concrete. Operators’ perspective: –It is expected that 11ac standard will extend capacity of wireless home network which conveys network services (ex. on-demand video streaming services) to subscribers not only detached house but also apartment house users. Slide 4 It is important to examine the wireless environment in apartment house users * “Housing and Land Survey in 2008” done by Statistics Bureau in Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, Japan.

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT Statistical analysis for the number of OBSSs according to “Housing and Land Survey * ” in Japan Evaluation conditions: –Ave. dimensions of each apartment * : W / L / H = 16.5 / 33 / 10 [ft] –Tx power: 17 –Power loss of room wall and floor [1]: 13 [dB] –APs location: Each AP is placed at the center of each apartment house –Carrier sense level (which is equal to interference threshold): / / / Bandwidth expansion to more than 40MHz causes one or more OBSSs in above apartment environment. –Some kinds of techniques to reduce the influence of OBSSs should be considered. Slide 5 Interference level [dBm] in each apartment because of the AP in the top left apartment **. * Based on the “Housing and Land Survey, 2008.” ** IEEE n channel model B – Residential.

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT OBSS issue Consider frame transmissions using 80MHz (or 160 MHz) channel bandwidth. –As shown in previous slide, OBSS is likely to happen due to lack of channels when using 80MHz (or 160MHz) bandwidth. –This increases the frame collision probability at STAs which are placed in OBSS environment (especially, when APs are hidden to each other). Moreover, TGac allows transmitting very large (up to 1 MB) A-MPDUs in one transmission attempt. –Therefore, the duration of a frame transmission tends to be longer. –This also may increase the frame collision probability especially at STAs in OBSS environment. Slide 6

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT TGac background DL MU-MIMO, which allows simultaneous frame transmissions to different STAs, is a key feature in TGac. Multi-RTS [2], Multiple CTSs [3] schemes (hereafter called MU-RTS scheme) were presented in September 2010 meeting, and showed qualitatively the importance of MAC protection mechanism [4] for TGac. –Straw Poll results are summarised in page 3 of Ref. [5]. Even though OBSS scenarios are complicated [6], TGac agrees to see how 11ac devices behave in OBSS environment [7, 8]. –So far, however, not that much evaluation results were presented. In next slides we show some OBSS simulation results. Slide 7

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT Frame sequence for MU-RTS scheme Slide 8 AP can transmit A-MPDUs to up to 4 STAs simultaneously using DL MU-MIMO technique. AP sends DATA frame only to STAs who replied with CTSs. The length of an A-MPDU depends on the current number of MSDUs buffered at the AP. AP sends DATA frame only to STAs who replied with CTSs. The length of an A-MPDU depends on the current number of MSDUs buffered at the AP. All BAs are scheduled and transmitted in the same order as CTSs. When AP accesses to medium, it first transmits a CTStoSelf followed by MU-RTS [2, 3]. Each STA responds with a CTS frame if it is ready to receive DATA frame from the AP. CTStoSelf

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT Simulation conditions and scenarios Slide 9 AP-1AP-2 BSS-2BSS-1 AP-1AP-2 BSS-2BSS-1 Consider only downlink UDP traffic Two overlapping BSSs Each BSS consists of one AP and 4 STAs xSTAs (x=1,2,…,4) hear signal of the other AP APs are hidden or non-hidden to each other STAs can receive any frames correctly unless there are collisions (bit errors caused by thermal noise and channel fading are not considered) MPDUs for each STA are generated at the corresponding AP by i.i.d. hidden APnon-hidden AP

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT Slide AP-1AP-2 BSS-2BSS AP-1AP-2 BSS-2BSS AP-1AP-2 BSS-2BSS AP-1AP-2 BSS-2BSS-1 hidden AP; 1STAhidden AP; 2STAs hidden AP; 3STAshidden AP; 4STAs

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT Parameter values Slide 11 Parameter Value Bandwidth per channel80 [MHz] The # of subcarrier per spatial stream 216 MCS64QAM, 5/6 Data rate270 [Mbps] Basic rate 6 [Mbps] The # of APs2 The # of STAs per AP4 The # of antennas per AP8 The # of antennas per STA2 The # of streams towards STA in a single transmission 2 ParameterValue MU-RTS length37[B]=76 [usec] CTS length14[B]=44 [usec] BA length28[B]=52 [usec] SIFS16 [usec] DIFS34 [usec] SlotTime 9 [usec] ACK timeout interval58 [usec] MSDU size1,500 [B] Max. A-MPDU size65,535 [B] CWmin15 CWmax1,023 Retry Limit (Long, Short)(4, 7) Simulator: OPNET 15.0.A

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT Simulation results Slide 12 no hidden nodes, without MU-RTS no hidden nodes, with MU-RTS hidden AP; 4STAs, without MU-RTS hidden AP; 3STAs, without MU-RTS hidden AP; 2STAs, without MU-RTS hidden AP; 1STA, without MU-RTS hidden AP; x STAs, with MU-RTS hidden AP; 4 STAs, with MU-RTS x = 1, 2, …, 3

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT Summary We evaluate the performance of MU-RTS scheme. MU-RTS scheme slightly degrades the system throughput when APs are known (non-hidden) to each other, because of the additional overhead due to MU-RTS and multiple CTSs. When APs are hidden, MU-RTS greatly improves the system throughput. Needs some sort of protection mechanism for TGac. Frame sequences, Frame formats, and ACK mechanism (polled or scheduled) are TBD. –An example of frame format is described in [2] Slide 13

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT References [1] Rec. ITU-R P , "Propagation data and prediction methods for the planning of indoor radio communication systems and radio local are networks in the frequency range 900MHz to 100GHz," ITU-R Recommendation P Series, [2] Y. Morioka et al., “Multi-RTS Proposal,” Doc.: IEEE /1124r2. [3] T. Kaibo et al., “Multiple CTSs in MU-MIMO Transmission,” Doc.: IEEE /1067r0. [4] Y. J. Kim et al., “Considerations on MU-MIMO Protection in 11ac,” Doc.: IEEE /0335r1. [5] B. Hart et al., “TGac MU-MIMO Ad Hoc Minutes,” Doc.: IEEE /1161r0. [6] A. Ashley et al., “OBSS Requirements,” Doc.: IEEE /0944r7. [7] Y. Takatori, “Importance of Overlapped BSS issue in ac,” Doc.: IEEE /0630r1. [8] P. Loc et al., “TGac Functional Requirements and Evaluations Methodology Rev. 15,” Doc.: IEEE /0451r15. Slide 14

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT Annex Slide 15

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT Will it work with single legacy RTS/CTS? Slide 16 AP sends a legacy RTS to one of STAs that the AP intends to transmit DATA frame. STA selection procedure is TBD. The STA responds with a CTS frame if it is ready to receive DATA frame from the AP. BA BAR Upon receiving the CTS, AP starts transmitting DATA frame to multiple STAs using MU-MIMO. If AP does not receive CTS, it postpones the frame transmission and starts backoff. Retransmission procedure is TBD. Upon receiving the CTS, AP starts transmitting DATA frame to multiple STAs using MU-MIMO. If AP does not receive CTS, it postpones the frame transmission and starts backoff. Retransmission procedure is TBD. The STA which replied with CTS first acknowledges with BA. Other STAs do upon the reception of BAR from the AP The STA which replied with CTS first acknowledges with BA. Other STAs do upon the reception of BAR from the AP

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT Will it work with single legacy RTS/CTS? Slide AP-1AP-2 BSS-2BSS AP-0 BSS-0 Room #0 Room #1 Room #2 No! “Single legacy RTS/CTS” may not protect all STAs!! No! “Single legacy RTS/CTS” may not protect all STAs!! Apartment environment

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT Will it work with single legacy RTS/CTS? Pros: –No modifications to legacy Dot11 RTS/CTS mechanism –Less overhead –Backward compatibility Cons: –Cannot protect all STAs within a single RTS/CTS exchange DATA frame collisions still may occur Slide 18

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT How about multiple legacy RTSs/CTSs with a round-robin manner? Slide 19 AP STA-1 STA-2 STA-N … …… … max (N) = 4 CTS#1 BA#1 CTS#2 BA#2 CTS#4 BA#2 DATA (AP STA-1) DATA (AP STA-2) DATA (AP STA-N) AP transmits DATA frame, using MU-MIMO, only to STAs who replied with CTS. Need to modify the Dot11 NAV settings. Because, STA-2 sets NAV and prevent transmitting frames if it receives third part RTSs or CTSs. AP exchanges legacy RTS/CTS with all STAs that it intends to transmit DATA. The order is TBD. AP exchanges legacy RTS/CTS with all STAs that it intends to transmit DATA. The order is TBD. Each STA responds with a legacy CTS frame if it is ready to receive DATA frame from the AP. RTS#1 RTS#2 RTS#3 All BAs are scheduled and transmitted in the same order as CTSs.

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-10/1293r3 November 2010 B. A. Hirantha Sithira Abeysekera, NTT How about multiple legacy RTSs/CTSs with a round-robin manner? Pros: –Works with least modification –Ensures full protection –Backward compatibility Cons: –Needs some modifications on Dot11 default NAV settings –Large overhead Slide 20