November 2000 doc IEEE 802 11 00437 802

  • Slides: 4
Download presentation
November 2000 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -00/437 802. 11 Modeling Observations Authors: Matthew

November 2000 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -00/437 802. 11 Modeling Observations Authors: Matthew Sherman AT&T Labs - Research 180 Park Avenue Florham Park, NJ 07932 973 -236 -6791 [email protected] com Bob Miller AT&T Labs - Research 180 Park Avenue Florham Park, NJ 07932 973 -236 -6920 [email protected] com Date: November 9, 2000 802. 11 PCF Modeling Observations Nov 2000 1 Matthew Sherman, AT&T Labs - Research

November 2000 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -00/437 Model Results - Some Observations •

November 2000 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -00/437 Model Results - Some Observations • The model demonstrates only availability of a tool for evaluating E-MAC performance • Is not meant to demonstrate efficacy of any particular MAC (yet) • Shows why “Native” PCF can be effective in Qo. S applications compared to “Native” DCF 802. 11 PCF Modeling Observations Nov 2000 2 Matthew Sherman, AT&T Labs - Research

November 2000 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -00/437 Model Use for Optimization / Comparison

November 2000 doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -00/437 Model Use for Optimization / Comparison • Needs added sophistication, e. g. TCP/IP, which lowers throughput, impacts streams differently • Needs to be validated e. g. with another model and/or operating hardware data, if possible (current model throughputs are not realistic) • “Efficient Qo. S”, not just “Qo. S”, with many users, many media types, many protocols should be goal--need scenarios which differentiate “Basic PCF” from “Qo. S PCF” 802. 11 PCF Modeling Observations Nov 2000 3 Matthew Sherman, AT&T Labs - Research

November 2000 “ • 3. doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -00/437 Adopted Qo. S

November 2000 “ • 3. doc. : IEEE 802. 11 -00/437 Adopted Qo. S Req’ts from IEEE 802. 11 -00245 r 1 Qo. S Requirements – 3. 1. Corrections and enhancements to the PCF that may be required to best meet Qo. S performance objectives must be incorporated. – 3. 2. Differential handling of MSDUs supplied to the MAC with additional priorities and classes of service. – 3. 3. Bounded delay, prioritized acess, and bounded latency per MDSU (allocatable services), power management bypass mechanisms (which has priority in i. BSS and BSS may need a mechanism for separable handsets). – 3. 4. MAC SAP support for 802. 1 D/802. 1 q. – 3. 5. Support for multiple simultaneous streams with differing priority and class requirements. – 3. 6. Transmit Power Control. – 3. 7. To provide the hooks in the MAC to obtain remote channel information. 802. 11 PCF Modeling Observations Nov 2000 4 ” Matthew Sherman, AT&T Labs - Research