ieee 802.11 edcf: a qos solution for wlan javier del prado 1, sunghyun choi 2 and sai shankar 1 1...

IEEE 802.11 EDCF: a QoS Solution for WLAN

Javier del Prado1, Sunghyun Choi2 and Sai Shankar1

1Philips Research USA - Briarcliff Manor, NY2Seoul National University – Seoul, Korea

Email: {javier.delprado,sai.shankar}@philips.com, sunghyun.choi@ieee.org

2

Outline

• IEEE 802.11 WLAN• IEEE 802.11e EDCF • EDCF Bursting • Performance Evaluation• Conclusions

3

IEEE 802.11 WLAN

• IEEE 802.11 MAC Can be considered a wireless version of

Ethernet Best-Effort Traffic Referred as legacy MAC

• Currently the IEEE 802.11 Working Group is defining a supplement to support Quality of Service (QoS): IEEE 802.11e MAC Multimedia services

4

IEEE 802.11 WLAN MAC

• MAC is based on logical functions: Distributed Coordination Function (DCF)

– Based on Carrier Sense Multiple Access with Collision Avoidance (CSMA/CA)

Point Coordination Function (PCF)– Poll and Response mechanism

• MAC works with a single FIFO queue

5

The DCF of the 802.11 MAC

• Distributed MAC based on local assessment of the channel: is the medium busy?

6

Backoff Process

• Each station maintains its Contention Window (CW) value to select the Backoff Count (BO)

• The BO is a pseudorandom integer drawn from [0,CW]

• The CW is determined as follows: Originally is assigned CWmin After unsuccessful transmission:

CW := 2 · (CW + 1) – 1 Upper Bound of CWmax CW is reset to CWmin after successful

transmission

7

The Enhanced DCF for QoS: EDCF

EDCF Bursting

8

The Enhanced DCF (EDCF)

• Extension of the legacy DCF MAC for QoS• Defined in 802.11e Draft • Ability to differentiate frames with

different priorities Each frame from higher layers carries its

user priority (UP) value: supported up to 8 UPs

• Provides differentiated channel accesses to frames with different UPs

9

EDCF

• AIFS[UP] and CWmin[UP] instead of DIFS, and CWmin

10

EDCF Contention Parameters

• AIFS[UP] PIFS to protect Acknowledgement (ACK) transmission

• AIFS[UP] and CWmin[UP] announced by AP in beacon frames

• The smaller AIFS[UP], CWmin[UP] the shorter the channel access delay for UP

11

EDCF Multiple Queues

• Multiple FIFO queues in the MAC: up to 8 queues• Every queue is an independent contention entity

with its own contention parameters

12

EDCF Bursting

• EDCF TXOP limit announced in beacon frames by AP

• Legacy 802.11 allows single frame transmission

• EDCF Bursting: allows transmission of multiple frames within a time limit called Transmission Opportunity (TXOP)

13

Performance Evaluation

14

Simulation Parameters

• IEEE 802.11b PHY layer: 11 Mbps physical rate

• 3 types of trafficType Inter-arrival

Time (Avg. in sec)

Frame Size

(bytes)

On Time (sec)

Off Time (sec)

Data Rate

(Mbps) Voice Constant

(0.02) 92 Always 0 0.0368

Video Constant (0.001)

1464 0.012 0.088 1.4

Data Exponential (0.012)

1500 Always 0 1.0

15

Simulation Parameters

• EDCF parameters per traffic type

Type AIFS CWmin Voice PIFS 15 Video DIFS 15 Data DIFS 31

• May not be optimal parameters. These should be adapted dynamically by the AP

• Data traffic type parameters are equivalent to legacy DCF

16

DCF vs. EDCF

• 4 voice stations• 2 video stations• 4 data stations• Every Station sends a single traffic type

17

Simulation Results

• A) Throughput

DCF EDCF

18

EDCF

Simulation Results

• B) Data Dropped

DCF

19

Simulation Results

• C) Delay

DCF EDCF

20

EDCF Bursting

• 4 voice stations• 4 video stations• EDCF TXOP limit = 3.5 ms

2 video frames at 11 Mbps

21

Simulation Results

Throughput Data Dropped

22

Simulation Results

Video Delay Voice Delay

23

Conclusions• Comparison between DCF and EDCF

EDCF can provide differentiated access among different user priorities

• Evaluated EDCF Bursting Increases throughput performance at the cost

of larger delays for voice Reduces contention overhead

• Admission control unit and traffic policer are needed More than two video stations can not be

accommodated