Dynamic adaptation policies to improve quality of service of real-time multimedia applications in IEEE 802.11e WLAN Networks
- 111 Downloads
With the increased popularity of wireless broadband networks and the growing demand for multimedia applications, such as streaming video and teleconferencing, there is a need to support diverse multimedia services over the wireless medium. In order to efficiently address these diverse needs, efforts have been pursued to provide Quality of Service (QoS) mechanisms for medium access, resulting in a standard called IEEE 802.11e. One of the enhancements proposed in IEEE 802.11e is a polling-based access mechanism, which is targeted for real-time multimedia flows. In this polling-based scheme, scheduling and time allocation are based on flow reservations. Hence, the effectiveness of the mechanism is heavily dependent on the accuracy of the flow requirements in the reservation. Flow requirements, however, can vary over time and an allocation based on fixed reservations cannot address this variability. This limitation, which is present in the reference scheduler of IEEE 802.11e, leads to degraded multimedia quality for flows with variable requirements, even when channel resources are available.
In order to address the above limitation, we present an adaptation framework that dynamically adjusts the polling-based access mechanism and associates flows to different modes of access (polling-based/contention-based), according to the current needs of the application, as opposed to solely relying on the reservation parameters. We demonstrate that with our adaptation, the achieved QoS for real-time multimedia streams, in terms of delay and throughput metrics, can be significantly improved compared to other known mechanisms. Additionally, we show the benefits of our adaptation framework on overall multimedia quality and system capacity.
KeywordsIEEE 802.11e Quality of service Video streaming Wireless LAN Service level agreements
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.IEEE-802.11WG, “Draft supplement to standard for telecommunications and information exchange between systems -LAN/MAN specific requirements - part 11: MAC enhancements for quality of service (QoS),” IEEE 802.lie Standard Draft/D8.0, Feb. 2004.Google Scholar
- 2.J. Prado, “Mandatory TSPEC parameters and reference design of a simple scheduler,” IEEE 802.11-02/705arO, Nov. 2002.Google Scholar
- 3.T. V. Lakshman, A. Ortega, and A. R. Reibman, “VBR video: Tradeoffs and potentials,” in Proceedings of IEEE, vol. 86, pp. 952–973. May 1998.Google Scholar
- 4.Ming-Ting Sun and Amy Reibman, Compressed Video over Networks,chapter 9, Marcel Dekker, 2001.Google Scholar
- 5.Pierre Ansel, Qiang Ni, and Thierry Turletti, “An efficient scheduling scheme for IEEE 802.11e,” in Proc. of WiOpt (Modeling and Optimization in Mobile, Ad Hoc and Wireless Networks),Mar. 2004.Google Scholar
- 7.“Opnet simulation framework,” http://www.opnet.com.
- 8.“Video traces for network performance evaluation,” http://trace.eas.asu.edu.
- 9.C.N. Taylor and S. Dey, “ORBit: An adaptive data shaping technique for robust wireless video clip communication,” in Asilomar Conference on Signals Systems and Computers, Pacific Grove, Nov. 2003, pp. 1567–1571.Google Scholar
- 10.I. Aad and C. Castelluccia, “Differentiation mechanisms for IEEE 802.11,” in Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, Anchorage, AK, Apr. 2001, pp. 209–218.Google Scholar
- 11.M. Barry, A. T. Campbell, and A. Veres, “Distributed control algorithms for service differentiation in wireless packet networks,” in Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, Anchorage, AK, Apr. 2001, pp. 582-590.Google Scholar
- 12.Daji Qiao and K. G. Shin, “UMAV: A simple enhancement to the IEEE 802.11 DCF,” in Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, Hawaii, Jan. 2003.Google Scholar
- 13.A. Banchs and X. Perez, “Providing throughput guarantees in IEEE 802.11 Wireless LAN,” in Proceedings of IEEE WCNC, Orlando, FL, Mar. 2002, pp. 130–138.Google Scholar
- 14.S. Mangold, S. Choi, P. May, O. Klein, G. Hiertz, and L. Stibor, “IEEE 802.11e Wireless LAN for Quality of Service (invited paper),” in Proceedings of the European Wireless, Florence, Italy, Feb. 2002, vol. 1, pp. 32–39.Google Scholar
- 15.S. Choi, J. del Prado, S. Shankar, and S. Mangold, “IEEE 802.l1e contention-based channel access (EDCF) performance evaluation,” in Proceedings of IEEE ICC, Anchorage, Alaska, May 2003, pp. 1511–1156.Google Scholar
- 16.Anders Lindgren, Andreas Almquist, and Olov Schelén, “Quality of Service schemes for IEEE 802.11 Wireless LANs – an evaluation,” Special Issue of the Journal on Special Topics in Mobile Networking and Applications (MONET) on Performance Evaluation of Qos Architectures in Mobile Networks, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 223-235, June 2003.Google Scholar
- 17.A. Grilo and M. Nunes, “Peformance evaluation of IEEE 802.11e,” in Proceedings of IEEE PIMRC, Lisboa, Portugal, Sept. 2002, pp. 511–517.Google Scholar
- 18.Dajing Gu and Jinyun Zhang, “QoS enhancement in IEEE 802.11 wireless local area networks,” in Proceeding of World Wireless Congress (3G Wireless), 2003.Google Scholar
- 19.Lamia Romdhani, Qiang Ni, and Thierry Turletti, “Adaptive EDCF: Enhanced service differentiation for IEEE 802.11 wireless ad hoc networks,” in Proceedings of IEEE WCNC, Mar. 2003, pp. 1373–1378.Google Scholar
- 20.Mobile Communications: 7th CDMA International Conference, CIC 2002, vol. 2524 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, chapter Dynamic Offset Contention Window (DOCW) Algorithm for Wireles MAC in 802. l1e Based Wireless Home Networks, pp. 162–172, Springer-Verlag Heidelberg, Jan. 2003.Google Scholar
- 21.Naomi Ramos, Debashis Panigrahi, and Sujit Dey, “ChaPLeT: Channel-dependent packet level tuning for service differentiation in IEEE 802.1 le,” in Proceeding of Intl. Symposium on Wireless Personal Multimedia Communications, Yokusuka, Japan, Sept. 2003, pp. 86–90.Google Scholar
- 22.A. Banchs, X. Perez-Costa, and D. Qiao, “Providing throughput guarantees in IEEE 802.l1e Wireless LANs,” in Proceedings of International Teletraffic Congress, Berlin, Germany, Sept. 2003.Google Scholar
- 23.Chun-Ting Chou, Sai Shankar N, and Kang G. Shin, “Achieving per-stream QoS with distributed airtime allocation and admission control in IEEE 802. l1e Wireless LANs,” in Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, Miami, Florida, Mar. 2005, pp. 1585– 1595.Google Scholar
- 25.Lynn Zhang, Ye Ge, and Jennifer Hou, “Energy-efficient real-time scheduling in IEEE Wireless LANs,” in IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, Providence, Rhode Island, May 2003, pp. 658-673.Google Scholar
- 26.Wing Fai Fan, Deyun Gao, D.H.K. Tsang, and B. Bensaou, “Admission control for variable bit rate traffic in IEEE 802.l1e WLANs,” in International Symposium on Multi-Dimensional Mobile Communications, Aug. 2004, pp. 272–277.Google Scholar
- 27.L.W. Lim, R. Malik, P.Y. Tan, C. Apichaichalermwongse, K. Ando, and Y. Harada, “A QoS scheduler for IEEE 802.1 le WLANs,” in Proceedings of IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conference, Las Vegas, Jan. 2004, pp. 199–204.Google Scholar
- 28.X. James Dong, Mustafa Ergen, Pravin Varaiya, and Anuj Puri, “Improving the aggregate throughput of access points in IEEE 802.11 Wireless LANs,” in IEEE Workshop on Wireless Local Networks, Bonn, Germany, Oct. 2003, pp. 682–691.Google Scholar
- 29.Sai Shankar N, Zhiping Hu, and Mihaela van der Schaar, “Cross-layer optimized transmission of wavelet video over IEEE 802.11a/e WLANs,” in Proceedings of International Packet Video Workshop, Irvine, CA, Dec. 2004.Google Scholar