1 / 31

A Latency and Modulation Aware Bandwidth Allocation Algorithm for WiMAX Base Stations

A Latency and Modulation Aware Bandwidth Allocation Algorithm for WiMAX Base Stations. Yi-Neng Lin, Che-Wen Wu, Ying-Dar Lin, National Chiao -Tung University Yuan-Cheng Lai National Taiwan University of Science and Technology. Outline. Introduction Related works Highest Urgency First

simon-barnes
Télécharger la présentation

A Latency and Modulation Aware Bandwidth Allocation Algorithm for WiMAX Base Stations

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. A Latency and Modulation Aware Bandwidth Allocation Algorithm for WiMAX Base Stations Yi-Neng Lin, Che-Wen Wu, Ying-Dar Lin, National Chiao-Tung University Yuan-Cheng Lai National Taiwan University of Science and Technology

  2. Outline • Introduction • Related works • Highest Urgency First • Evaluation results • Conclusion

  3. Introduction • Related works • [5] propose the MLWDF to maximize the channel capacity for multiple MSs performing real-time applications to support QoS • [6] propose the Uplink Packet Scheduling (UPS) for service differentiation. It exploits the Strict Priority to select the target class to be scheduled [5] M. Andrews et al., “Providing Quality of Services over a Shared Wireless link,” IEEE Communication Magazine, Feb. 2001, pp. 150-154. [6] K. Wongthavarawat, A. Ganz, “IEEE 802.16 Based Last Mile Broadband Wireless Military Networks with Quality of Service Support,” MILCOM, Oct. 2003.

  4. Introduction • Deficit Fair Priority Queue (DFPQ) [7] revises the UPS by replacing the Strict Priority with the use of maximum sustained rate as the deficit counter for the transmission quantum of every service class, and therefore can dynamically adjust the DL and UL proportion according to the counters [7] J. Chen, W. Jiao, H. Wang, “A Service Flow Management Strategy for IEEE 802.16 Broadband Wireless Access Systems in TDD Mode,” ICC, May 2005.

  5. Introduction • Two Phase Proportionating (TPP) [8] introduces a simple approach to dynamically proportionate the DL and UL sub-frames and considers the minimum reserved rate, maximum sustained rate and the requested bandwidth of service classes in terms of the A-Factor to grant the bandwidth for MSs proportionally [8] Y. N. Lin, S. H. Chien, Y. D. Lin, Y. C. Lai, M. Liu, "Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation for 802.16e-2005 MAC," Book Chapter of "Current Technology Developments of WiMax Systems," edited by Maode Ma, to be published by Springer, 2007.

  6. Introduction • Motivation • All above schemes do not consider the MCS which affects the transmission data rate and the service quality • Goal • To find the traded off between throughput and fairness

  7. Introduction

  8. Highest Urgency First data size of the data/request

  9. Highest Urgency First maximum latency of the service flow frame duration -1, If the maximum latency is not set in the service flow deadline 0, violation of the maximum latency requirement ≧1

  10. Highest Urgency First • First phase • Deadline equal one UGS nrtPS ertPS BE UGS nrtPS ertPS BE rtPS rtPS DownLink UpLink

  11. Highest Urgency First • First phase • Deadline equal one slot：DL_A slot：UL_A UGS nrtPS ertPS BE UGS nrtPS ertPS BE rtPS rtPS DownLink UpLink

  12. Highest Urgency First • First phase • sum up the amount of slots translated from the minimum reserved rate of every service flow DL_B UL_B UGS nrtPS ertPS BE UGS nrtPS ertPS BE rtPS rtPS DownLink UpLink

  13. Highest Urgency First • First phase • To calculate the amount of symbols to be reserved • PUSC mode a slot duration spans two symbols in DL yet three in UL • Sreserved = (DL_A+DL_B)*2+(UL_A+UL_B)*3 DownLink UpLink

  14. Highest Urgency First • First phase • Srem = Stotal - Sreserved number of remaining symbols number of symbols in a DL slot duration number of symbols in a UL slot duration Frame duration x DL UL

  15. Highest Urgency First • Second phase • For DL and UL, respectively, sum up the number of data/requests slots whose deadline equals to one in all queues so as to reserve bandwidth for those that must be served in this frame Frame duration UL DL

  16. Highest Urgency First • Second phase • Calculate the average-U-factor for every service flow • Urgency of the ithrequest in the flow number of slots translated from the requested size deadline stands for the flow priority zero (lowest) to seven (highest)

  17. Highest Urgency First • Second phase U1 U1 U2 U2 U3 U3 U4 U4 U5 U5 UGS nrtPS ertPS BE UGS nrtPS ertPS BE rtPS rtPS DownLink UpLink

  18. Highest Urgency First • Second phase U1 U1 U2 U2 U3 U3 U4 U4 U5 U5 Frame duration UGS nrtPS ertPS BE UGS nrtPS ertPS BE rtPS rtPS UL DL DownLink UpLink

  19. Highest Urgency First • Second phase • Generates the corresponding DL and UL MAPs DL Frame duration UL Deadline = Deadline - 1

  20. Evaluation results

  21. Evaluation results

  22. Evaluation results • Modulation-aware Allocation

  23. Evaluation results • Latency Guarantee with Different Requirements

  24. Evaluation results

  25. Evaluation results

  26. Evaluation results

  27. Evaluation results • Fairness

  28. Evaluation results

  29. Evaluation results

  30. Conclusion • HUF outperforms the DFPQ by 25% in throughput when overloaded • we compare the fairness of UPS, DFPQ, TPP and HUF and observe fairness between rtPS and BE in HUF which, unlike the TPP, avoids inappropriate grant for rtPS

  31. Thank you

More Related