1 / 28

Scheduling Algorithms in Broad-Band Wireless Networks

Scheduling Algorithms in Broad-Band Wireless Networks. YAXIN CAO AND VICTOR O. K. LI, FELLOW, IEEE. IEEE PROCEEDINGS OF THE IEEE, VOL. 89, NO. 1, JANUARY 2001. 報告者 : 李宗穎. Outline. Introduction System Model Major Issue in Wireless Scheduling Different Scheduling Methods

foster
Télécharger la présentation

Scheduling Algorithms in Broad-Band Wireless Networks

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Scheduling Algorithms in Broad-Band Wireless Networks YAXIN CAO AND VICTOR O. K. LI, FELLOW, IEEE IEEE PROCEEDINGS OF THE IEEE, VOL. 89, NO. 1, JANUARY 2001 報告者 : 李宗穎

  2. Outline • Introduction • System Model • Major Issue in Wireless Scheduling • Different Scheduling Methods • Compared and Conclusion

  3. Introduction • The characteristics of wireless communication pose special problems that do not exist in wireline networks • high error rate and bursty errors • location-dependent and time-varying wireless link capacity • scarce bandwidth • user mobility • power constraint

  4. Wireless Network Model • Downlink • the base station has full knowledge of the status of downlink queues • Uplink • The base station performs uplink scheduling based on these requests and related information

  5. Wireless Link Model • good (or error-free) • the wireless link is assumed to be error-free • bad (or error) • packets transmitted on the link will be corrupted with very high probability

  6. Major Issues • Wireless Link Variability • Fairness • QoS • Data Throughput and Channel Utilization • Power Constraint and Simplicity

  7. Wireless Link Variability • wireless channels are more error-prone and suffer from interference, fading, and shadowing • some mobile hosts may enjoy error-free communication with the base station, while others may not be able to communicate at all

  8. Fairness • wireline media may be considered error-free ,the wireless link is actually in an error-state • the packet will be corrupted and the transmission will waste transmission resources in error-state

  9. QoS • at least prioritized scheduling service for aggregated traffic with QoS differentiation • per-flow-based guaranteed QoS performance, such as delay or jitter bound

  10. Data Throughput and Channel Utilization • minimize unproductive transmissions on error links • maximize the effective service delivered and the utilization of the wireless channels

  11. Power Constraint and Simplicity • minimal number of scheduling-related control messages • the scheduling algorithm should not be too complex

  12. Channel state dependent packet scheduling (CSDPS) Bad state LSM mark Waiting time out It does not have any mechanism to guarantee bandwidth and the algorithm does not provide any guarantees on packet delay

  13. CSDPS + CBQ (class-based queueing) • A class is called unsatisfied if it has persistentbacklogs, and the service it recently received is less than itsallocated fraction • When class exceeds its allocated bandwidth share and contributes to any other class’ unsatisfied state. Such a queue is called a restricted queue

  14. Idealize Weight Fair Queue (IWFQ) (1/3) • Queue size • leading • lagging • in sync

  15. Idealize Weight Fair Queue (IWFQ) (2/3) • When a packet of sequence number of flow arrives, it is tagged with virtual service start time Si,nand finish time fi,n Si,n = max{v(A(t)), fi,n-1} fi,n = Si,n + Li,n/ri • The scheduler always chooses to serve the packet with the smallest finish time Li,n : packet size of the arrived packet V(A(t)) : system virtual time defined in WFQ ri : service rate allocated to flow

  16. Idealize Weight Fair Queue (IWFQ) (3/3) • Lagging bound • all flows that will be compensated is bounded by B bits • A flow i with weight ri is allowed to compensate a maximum of • Leading bound • for more than li bits, it will only surrender up to li bits of service share to other flows later on • To implement this bound, the scheduler checks each leading flow after transmitting one packet

  17. channel-condition independent packet fair queueing (CIF-Q) (1/4) • Each flow has its own queue, and the real error-prone scheduling system is S associated with an error-free system Sr • Arrived packets are put into queues both in S and Sr (virtual queue) • No link error, packet is chosen in Sr and served in both S and Sr • Link error, the real packet in the queue of S is kept, but the virtual packet in the queue of Sr is still served

  18. channel-condition independent packet fair queueing (CIF-Q) (2/4) • lagi is flow i serving different between S and Sr • To achieve graceful degradation, a parameter α is used to define the minimal average rate (αri)

  19. channel-condition independent packet fair queueing (CIF-Q) (3/4) • packet in S is transmitted unless one of the following situations occurs • a) Link is an error state • b) Leading flow and receive more than αri • Lagging flows have higher priority to receive additional service in a) and b) • the compensation is distributed among the lagging flows • If no lagging flow, the additional service is distributed to nonlagging flows

  20. channel-condition independent packet fair queueing (CIF-Q) (4/4) • Compared with IWFQ, CIF-Q improves scheduling fairness by associating compensation rate and penalty rate with a flow’s allocated service rate and guaranteeing flows with error-free links with a minimal service rate

  21. Server-based fair approach (SBFA) (1/3) • SBFA allocated to some compensation server(s), called long-term fairness server • The scheduler maintains two queues, packet queue (PQ) and slot queue (SQ) for each flow • SQ is the virtual queue in this system

  22. Server-based fair approach (SBFA) (2/3) Round Robin Policy

  23. Server-based fair approach (SBFA) (3/3) • Problem • LTFS needs preallocated network resources • the algorithm does not work well if the packet size of a flow is variable

  24. Improved channel state dependent packet scheduling (I-CSDPS) (1/2) • deficit counter (DC) • keeps a record of the total credit received less the credit used • compensation counter (CC) • CC keeps track of the amount of lost service for each flow • quantum size (QS) • Determines how much credit, in number of bits or bytes, is given to a flow in each round

  25. Improved channel state dependent packet scheduling (I-CSDPS) (2/2) bad state • At the beginning of each round αCC amount of credit is added to DC, and CC is decreased by the same amount, where 0 < α < 1 QS1 = 100, QS2 = 50 α1 = 1/3, α2=1/2

  26. Comparison

  27. Future Work • Adaptive Error-Correction Coding and Deferment of Transmissions • Scheduling in CDMA Networks—Multiple Servers and Multiple Link States • Integration of Admission Control, Scheduling, and Congestion Control

  28. Conclusion • This paper presented a comprehensive and in-depth survey on current research in wireless packet scheduling. • The major issues in wireless scheduling were discussed

More Related