1 / 29

Isolating Physical PER for Smart Rate Selection in 802.11

Isolating Physical PER for Smart Rate Selection in 802.11. Malik Ahmad Yar Khan and Darryl Veitch ARC Special Centre for Ultra-Broadband Information Networks (CUBIN) The University of Melbourne, Australia IEEE Infocom 2009 (acceptance rate = 19.65%). Outline. Introduction The core idea

calum
Télécharger la présentation

Isolating Physical PER for Smart Rate Selection in 802.11

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. Isolating Physical PER for Smart Rate Selection in 802.11 Malik Ahmad Yar Khan and Darryl VeitchARC Special Centre for Ultra-Broadband Information Networks (CUBIN)The University of Melbourne, AustraliaIEEE Infocom 2009(acceptance rate = 19.65%)

  2. Outline • Introduction • The core idea • RCA modification • Fragmentation implementation • RTS/CTS implementation • Performance • Conclusion

  3. Introduction • Rate selection algorithms in use in 802.11 suffer from a fundamental problem • Implicity or explicity make decisions bases on total Packet Error Rate (PER) • False rate decision lowers the system throughput

  4. Introduction • Total PER = PPER + CPER • PPER: Physical PER • CPER: contention PER • It is often the case CPER dominates PPER • Poor latency, loss and throughput

  5. PER under a ideal environment

  6. Goal of the paper • Providing a novel way to isolate the physical error • Providing a modular way of isolating the contention error which any rate adaptation algorithm can be enhanced

  7. Fragmentation • Only consider a packet is fragmented into 2 frames • The fragment 2 is sent out only after an SIFS after the final ACK • Provided there are no hidden terminals

  8. Fragmentation • If the first fragment is lost, for nay reason, the second will not even be sent • Observation: the loss of a second fragment on the first transmission attempt • Physical error

  9. RTS/CTS • Once the RTS-CTS exchange is completed, the data packet will have the channel reserved, and will only encounter error for physical reasons

  10. Block reservation in 802.11e • An option in IEEE 802.11e • The second data packet of such blocks could be used to directly measure PPER

  11. Main concept • Not to use these methods all the time in practice • Only trigger their use often enough to gather good statistics on PPER

  12. Scatterplots of PER with no cross traffic

  13. Scatterplots of PER with CT and fragmentation

  14. Scatterplots of PER with CT and fragmentation (RTS/CTS on)

  15. Rate dependence of IP throughput

  16. Fragmentation implementation • Only descriptors of second fragments are passed to the RCAs • A mechanism is needed to trigger the fragmentation of selected packets • Maintains a simple ON/OFF variable

  17. RTS/CTS implementation • RTS/CTS protection is switched on by a per-packet decision • Use Long Retry Count (LRC) to record the statistic of RTS/CST transmission

  18. Performance • Two main metrics • Weighted mean rate summaries • IP throughput • All experiments are run in IEEE 802.11a in testbed • Full rate set:{6,9,12,18,24,36,48,54} • Packet size: 1500 bytes • 10 stations if no further explanation

  19. The wireless testbed • St[1-13] are stations, Sniff[1-2] are sniffers

  20. Two implementation protocols • SampleRate • A MIT master thesis • Implemented on MadWifi • AMRR • A multi-rate algorithm also implemented on MadWifi

  21. Single user with different RCAs

  22. TPER for single user case for AMRR

  23. SampleRate with different packet sizes (1472B)

  24. SampleRate with different packet sizes (716B)

  25. UDP upstream system throughput

  26. TCP upstream system throughput

  27. Conclusion • The paper investigates two ways to isolate Physical PER • RTS/CTS • MAC level packet fragmentation • Higher channel rates were used when PPER was in fact low, even when contention is present

  28. Thank you!!

More Related