November 2000 doc IEEE 802 15 00382 r
November, 2000 doc. : IEEE 802. 15 -00/382 r 0 Project: IEEE P 802. 15 Working Group for Wireless Personal Area Networks (WPANs) Submission Title: [TG 3 -MAC-Committee-Report ] Date Submitted: [November 6, 2000] Source: [Allen Heberling] Company [Eastman Kodak, Company] Address [4545 East River Road, Rochester, New York, 14650 -0898, USA] Voice: [(716)-781 -9328], FAX: [(716)-781 -9733], E-Mail: [allen. heberling@kodak. com] Re: [. ] Purpose: [To inform the 802. 15 community of the TG 3 MAC Committee’s accomplishments since the Phoenix interim meeting. ] Notice: This document has been prepared to assist the IEEE P 802. 15. It is offered as a basis for discussion and is not binding on the contributing individual(s) or organization(s). The material in this document is subject to change in form and content after further study. The contributor(s) reserve(s) the right to add, amend or withdraw material contained herein. Release: The contributor acknowledges and accepts that this contribution becomes the property of IEEE and may be made publicly available by P 802. 15. Submission 1 Allen Heberling, Eastman Kodak, Co.
November, 2000 doc. : IEEE 802. 15 -00/382 r 0 TG 3 MAC Committee Monday Report Submission 2 Allen Heberling, Eastman Kodak, Co.
November, 2000 doc. : IEEE 802. 15 -00/382 r 0 Current Status of TG 3 MAC Committee • Since the interim Phoenix meeting the TG 3 MAC committee has seen: – the adoption of the Heberling MAC algorithm by both the Kinney MAC proposal and the Davis/Skellern/Parks MAC Proposal. – an updating of the Kinney MAC proposal ratings in doc 00245 r 11 for: Qo. S and Power consumption – completion of the Pugh MAC criteria matrix evaluation contained in doc 00245 r 11 Submission 3 Allen Heberling, Eastman Kodak, Co.
November, 2000 doc. : IEEE 802. 15 -00/382 r 0 Current Status of TG 3 MAC Committee continued. . . – updates by the MAC proposers to these documents: • • Kinney’s doc: 205 r 2 Davis/Skellern/Parks’ doc: 208 r 3 and 209 r 3 Heberling’s doc: 212 r 1 Rios’ doc: 356 r 0, 357 r 0 and 358 r 0 – creation of doc: 00354 r 2 MAC Scenarios Throughput Comparison Workbook. Submission 4 Allen Heberling, Eastman Kodak, Co.
November, 2000 doc. : IEEE 802. 15 -00/382 r 0 Overview of doc: 00354 r 2 MAC Scenarios Throughput Comparison Workbook. • Purpose: – to provide a venue in which to compare competing MAC proposals on the basis of their percent efficiency and effective throughput rates using three different scenarios. – to provide a summary comparison worksheet in which all of the MAC proposals are compared when paired with each PHY proposal. Submission 5 Allen Heberling, Eastman Kodak, Co.
November, 2000 doc. : IEEE 802. 15 -00/382 r 0 Overview of doc: 00354 r 2 MAC Scenarios Throughput Comparison Workbook continued. . . – to provide the PHY and MAC subcommittees a means of answering these evaluation criteria: • • Submission Minimum Delivered Throughput High end Delivered Throughput Minimum MAC/PHY delivered throughput High end MAC/PHY delivered throughput 6 Allen Heberling, Eastman Kodak, Co.
November, 2000 doc. : IEEE 802. 15 -00/382 r 0 Overview of doc: 00354 r 2 MAC Scenarios Throughput Comparison Workbook continued. . . Results: – The comparisons are: • first level approximations based upon static models of each MAC/PHYpair. • Based upon the same data traffic scenario: Asynchronous Data between nodes A-->B and C<-->D. Submission 7 Allen Heberling, Eastman Kodak, Co.
November, 2000 doc. : IEEE 802. 15 -00/382 r 0 Overview of doc: 00354 r 2 MAC Scenarios Throughput Comparison Workbook continued. . . Results: – Differences: • Kinney MAC, Davis/et al MAC, Heberling MAC are minor due to differences in: – PLCP header, MAC header and ACK header bit formats. – And due to their using the same Slot-Cycle TDMA algorithm. • Rios MAC illustrates the Point Coordination Function approach to managing data streams. Submission 8 Allen Heberling, Eastman Kodak, Co.
November, 2000 doc. : IEEE 802. 15 -00/382 r 0 Overview of doc: 00354 r 2 MAC Scenarios Throughput Comparison Workbook continued. . . Conclusions: • doc 354 r 2 accomplished its objectives – of fostering discussion among • the MAC proposers • the PHY proposers – of providing a means for comparing the Effective through put rates and Protocol Efficiencies of each MAC/PHY pairing. Submission 9 Allen Heberling, Eastman Kodak, Co.
November, 2000 doc. : IEEE 802. 15 -00/382 r 0 Acknowledgements: I would like to thank all of the MAC proposers for contributing their time, their technical insights and their passion to the MAC subcommittee’s evaluation process during the weekly conference calls and Plenary/Interim meetings. Submission 10 Allen Heberling, Eastman Kodak, Co.
- Slides: 10