Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

January 2013 doc.: IEEE /0153r0 July 2017

Published byGregory Lynch Modified over 6 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "January 2013 doc.: IEEE /0153r0 July 2017"— Presentation transcript:

1 January 2013 doc.: IEEE /0153r0 July 2017 Measurements of temporal occupancy and a comparison of indoor performance of OFDM vs CCK/DSSS Authors: Date: Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder) Clint Chaplin, Chair (Samsung)

2 Abstract As a class project, students made measurements of:
January 2013 doc.: IEEE /0153r0 July 2017 Abstract As a class project, students made measurements of: 1) Channel occupancy of WLAN traffic in different environments to assess how much time is spent in each of the data rates and overall protocol efficiency, and 2) Comparison of indoor performance of OFDM vs CCK/DSSS Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder) Clint Chaplin, Chair (Samsung)

3 1) Channel occupancy - Problem Statement
July 2017 1) Channel occupancy - Problem Statement Use packet capture and analysis tools to analyze the temporal occupancy, packet type distribution, and data rate distribution of deployed systems in the following environments: High density, unmanaged public retail networks Managed university network (campus-wide ESS) Residential unmanaged networks Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

4 July 2017 Methodology Most students used Microsoft Network Monitor to capture packets Has a “monitor mode” to capture packets by scanning across channels (unassociated) Some students used OmniPeek if they had access Save as a .cap file so Wireshark can analyze Students used Excel to create charts Some wrote custom scripts to analyze packets Summarize results in reports Most students only examined 2.4GHz networks, so that is all that will be summarized here Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

5 July 2017 Data Capture #1 Microsoft Network Monitor (free) can be used to capture packets in any channel in unassociated mode - OmniPeek has the same capability, but isn’t free Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

6 Data capture #2 Wireshark used to sort and classify packet traffic
July 2017 Data capture #2 Wireshark used to sort and classify packet traffic Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

7 Locations for Measurements
July 2017 Locations for Measurements Pearl Street Mall (dense retail shops) Unmanaged networks University of Colorado Campus Managed network – ESS Residential environment Dorm, apartment, house Pearl Street Mall Engineering - University of Colorado at Boulder Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

8 Results #1: Pearl Street (1/2)
July 2017 Results #1: Pearl Street (1/2) Number of Packets Collected: ~12,000 Collection Date & Time: 2:40pm Collection Length: 00:02:39 Over 75% of packets transmitted at data rate of 1&2Mbps and almost 69% of time at 1Mbps Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

9 Results #1: Pearl Street (2/2)
July 2017 Results #1: Pearl Street (2/2) Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

10 Results #2: CU-Boulder (1/2)
July 2017 Results #2: CU-Boulder (1/2) Number of Packets Collected: ~12,000 Collection Date & Time: 4:00pm Collection Length: 00:02:57 Over 70% of the packets used data rate of 1&2Mbps with over 53% of time at 1Mbps. Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

11 Results #2: CU-Boulder (2/2)
July 2017 Results #2: CU-Boulder (2/2) Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

12 Results #3: Residential (1/2)
July 2017 Results #3: Residential (1/2) Number of Packets Collected: ~11,000 Collection Date & Time: 12:10am Collection Length: 00:02:12 Although over 29% of packets used data rate of 1Mbps, the time spent at this data rate was ~15%. Over 25% of packets used data rate of 54Mbps (59% of the time) and ~28% of packets used a rate of 24Mbps (3.1% of the time). Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

13 Results #3: Residential (2/2)
July 2017 Results #3: Residential (2/2) Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

14 Additional results – Pearl Street
July 2017 Additional results – Pearl Street Occupancy: 2.06/2.3 minutes Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

15 Additional results – Campus
July 2017 Additional results – Campus Occupancy: 0.66/0/92 minutes Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

16 Additional results – Residence
July 2017 Additional results – Residence Occupancy: 0.7/2.45 minutes Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

17 2) Indoor OFDM vs DSSS/CCK - Problem Statement
July 2017 2) Indoor OFDM vs DSSS/CCK - Problem Statement Use packet capture and analysis tools to compare the performance of OFDM preambles vs DSSS/CCK preambles: Assess PER or throughput vs distance Compare indoor and outdoor if possible Ensure that captured packets are only coming from the target AP, which has been configured to run iPerf with the desired preamble type Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

18 Indoor measurements – Discovery Learning Center @ CU-Boulder
July 2017 Indoor measurements – Discovery Learning CU-Boulder Cisco Aironet 2700 Dual Band Access Point and Iperf 3 AP manually configured to send only 1Mbps for DSSS tests AP manually configured for OFDM-only preambles and 7Mbps payload for OFDM tests Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

19 Indoor measurements – raw data - #1
July 2017 Indoor measurements – raw data - #1 Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

20 Indoor measurements – graph - #1
July 2017 Indoor measurements – graph - #1 Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

21 Indoor measurements – raw data - #2
July 2017 Indoor measurements – raw data - #2 DSSS 6Mbps OFDM S.No Range (in meters) Bytes sent by client (in KBytes) Bytes received by receiver(in KBytes) Packet Error Rate 1) 3 384 312 0.1875 2) 6 300 3) 9 309 0.1953 4) 14 283 0.2630 5) 18 255 6) 23 252 7) 28 232 0.3960 S.No Range (in meters) Bytes sent by Client(in MBytes) Bytes Received by Server (in MBytes) Packet Error Rae 1) 3 1.88 1.87 0.005 2) 6 1.75 3) 9 2.00 4) 14 5) 18 1.71 0.02 6) 23 1.62 1.54 0.05 7) 28 1.44 0.11 Interference? Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

22 Indoor measurements – graph - #2
July 2017 Indoor measurements – graph - #2 DSSS 6Mbps OFDM 0.11 0.396 Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

23 Summary (2.4GHz) 1Mbps traffic predominates
July 2017 Summary (2.4GHz) 1Mbps traffic predominates Beacons Probe request/response - In congested environment, many more probe responses than probe requests RTS/CTS Over 75% of packets were 1Mbps management frames in congested environments OFDM preambles performed better than DSSS indoors Always delivered better throughput at the same range Difficult to assess failed preambles, but throughput results were consistent All papers are available Jim Lansford (Qualcomm/CU-Boulder)

Download ppt "January 2013 doc.: IEEE /0153r0 July 2017"

Similar presentations

Doc.: IEEE 802.11-13/1176r0 Submission Sep 2013 Reza Hedayat (Cisco Systems) Slide 1 Some Simulation Scenarios for HEW NameAffiliationPhoneEmail Reza HedayatCisco.

Doc.: IEEE /1176r0 Submission Sep 2013 Reza Hedayat (Cisco Systems) Slide 1 Some Simulation Scenarios for HEW NameAffiliationPhone Reza HedayatCisco.
Submission doc.: IEEE 802.11-15/0343r1 In Situ Frame Size Measurements March, 2015 Chuck Lukaszewski, Aruba NetworksSlide 1 Date: 2015-02-26 Authors:

Submission doc.: IEEE /0343r1 In Situ Frame Size Measurements March, 2015 Chuck Lukaszewski, Aruba NetworksSlide 1 Date: Authors:
Submission doc.: IEEE 802.11-15/0343r0 In Situ Frame Size Measurements March, 2015 Chuck Lukaszewski, Aruba NetworksSlide 1 Date: 2015-02-26 Authors:

Submission doc.: IEEE /0343r0 In Situ Frame Size Measurements March, 2015 Chuck Lukaszewski, Aruba NetworksSlide 1 Date: Authors:
Industry’s First 3-Stream 802.11n Competitive Testing October, 2012.

Industry’s First 3-Stream n Competitive Testing October, 2012.
Submission doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/1063r0 September 2012 Yasuhiko Inoue (NTT)Slide 1 Requirements on WLAN Cellular Offload Date: 2012-09-18 Authors:

Submission doc.: IEEE /1063r0 September 2012 Yasuhiko Inoue (NTT)Slide 1 Requirements on WLAN Cellular Offload Date: Authors:
Industry’s First 3-Stream 802.11n Competitive Testing October, 2012.

Industry’s First 3-Stream n Competitive Testing October, 2012.
Doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/0028r1 Submission January 2012 Anna Pantelidou, Renesas Mobile CorporationSlide 1 Power Saving Possibilities for Networks Supporting.

Doc.: IEEE /0028r1 Submission January 2012 Anna Pantelidou, Renesas Mobile CorporationSlide 1 Power Saving Possibilities for Networks Supporting.
Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0026r1 January 2014 Yong Liu, et al.Slide 1 Thoughts on HEW PAR Date: 2014-01-20 Authors:

Submission doc.: IEEE 11-14/0026r1 January 2014 Yong Liu, et al.Slide 1 Thoughts on HEW PAR Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE 802.11-11/0060r1 Submission January 2011 Minyoung Park, Intel Corp.Slide 1 Low Power Capability Support for 802.11ah Date: 2011-01-17 Authors:

Doc.: IEEE /0060r1 Submission January 2011 Minyoung Park, Intel Corp.Slide 1 Low Power Capability Support for ah Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE 802.11-13/0558r1 Submission May 2013 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 1 Coexistence and Optimization of Wireless LAN: Time, Frequency, Space,

Doc.: IEEE /0558r1 Submission May 2013 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 1 Coexistence and Optimization of Wireless LAN: Time, Frequency, Space,
Submission doc.: IEEE 802.11-13/0801r1 Akira Kishida, NTT Issues of Low-Rate Transmission Date: 2013-07-18 Authors:

Submission doc.: IEEE /0801r1 Akira Kishida, NTT Issues of Low-Rate Transmission Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE 802.11-14/0648r0 Submission May 2014 Chinghwa Yu et. al., MediaTekSlide 1 Performance Observation of a Dense Campus Network Date: 2014-05-11.

Doc.: IEEE /0648r0 Submission May 2014 Chinghwa Yu et. al., MediaTekSlide 1 Performance Observation of a Dense Campus Network Date:
Doc.: IEEE 802.11-14/0065r0 Submission January 2014 William Carney, SONYSlide 1 Comments on Draft HEW PAR Date: 2014-01-20 Authors:

Doc.: IEEE /0065r0 Submission January 2014 William Carney, SONYSlide 1 Comments on Draft HEW PAR Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE 802.11-13/0786r0 Submission July 2013 Wu TianyuSlide 1 Discussions on System Level Simulation Methodology Date: 2013-7-16 Authors:

Doc.: IEEE /0786r0 Submission July 2013 Wu TianyuSlide 1 Discussions on System Level Simulation Methodology Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE 802.19-yy/xxxxr0 SubmissionMukul Goyal, U Wisconsin MilwaukeeSlide 1 Impact of IEEE 802.11n Operation On IEEE 802.15.4 Performance Notice: This.

Doc.: IEEE yy/xxxxr0 SubmissionMukul Goyal, U Wisconsin MilwaukeeSlide 1 Impact of IEEE n Operation On IEEE Performance Notice: This.
Doc.: IEEE 802.11-13/0542r0 SubmissionSimone Merlin, QualcommSlide 1 HEW Scenarios and Goals Date: 2013-04-13 Authors: May 2013.

Doc.: IEEE /0542r0 SubmissionSimone Merlin, QualcommSlide 1 HEW Scenarios and Goals Date: Authors: May 2013.
SubmissionSlide 1Dwight Smith, Motorola Mobility Nov 2012doc.: IEEE 11-12/1332r0 Other 802.11 Service Discovery Concepts Date: 2012-11-12 Authors:

SubmissionSlide 1Dwight Smith, Motorola Mobility Nov 2012doc.: IEEE 11-12/1332r0 Other Service Discovery Concepts Date: Authors:
Doc.: IEEE 802.19-08/30r2 SubmissionMukul Goyal, U Wisconsin MilwaukeeSlide 1 Impact of IEEE 802.11n Operation On IEEE 802.15.4 Performance Notice: This.

Doc.: IEEE /30r2 SubmissionMukul Goyal, U Wisconsin MilwaukeeSlide 1 Impact of IEEE n Operation On IEEE Performance Notice: This.
Doc.: IEEE 802.11-12/1259r0 SubmissionYunlu Liu (China Mobile)Slide 1 Measurement Reporting in WLAN Date: 2012-10-31 Authors: Nov 2012.

Doc.: IEEE /1259r0 SubmissionYunlu Liu (China Mobile)Slide 1 Measurement Reporting in WLAN Date: Authors: Nov 2012.
Doc.: IEEE 802.11-15/0754r0 Submission July 2015 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 1 IEEE 802.11ax High Efficiency WLAN WLAN Packet traffic and efficiency.

Doc.: IEEE /0754r0 Submission July 2015 Jim Lansford, CSR TechnologySlide 1 IEEE ax High Efficiency WLAN WLAN Packet traffic and efficiency.

Similar presentations

Ads by Google