1 / 39

Short-term Fairness for TCP Flows in 802.11b WLANs

Short-term Fairness for TCP Flows in 802.11b WLANs. M. Bottigliengo, C. Casetti, C.-F. Chiasserini, M. Meo INFOCOM 2004. Outline. Introduction Reference Scenario Scheduling Algorithm Description Simulation Scenario Numerical Results Conclusions My Comments. Introduction.

william-dale
Download Presentation

Short-term Fairness for TCP Flows in 802.11b WLANs

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. Short-term Fairness for TCP Flows in 802.11b WLANs M. Bottigliengo, C. Casetti, C.-F. Chiasserini, M. Meo INFOCOM 2004

  2. Outline • Introduction • Reference Scenario • Scheduling Algorithm Description • Simulation Scenario • Numerical Results • Conclusions • My Comments

  3. Introduction • WLANs using the 802.11b technology add some obstacles to QoS provisioning • Poor channel quality depending on relative position of wireless station (WS) • Interference from hidden terminals • The anomaly due to the different speeds at which WSs transmit

  4. Introduction (cont’d) • This paper addresses the fairness issue among TCP flows • Short-lived flows, representing the majority of today’s Web traffic, suffer from packet losses occurring during or just past the three-way handshake phase • The TCP congestion window size may not be large enough so as to trigger the Fast Recovery algorithm

  5. This paper… • The main contribution of this paper is the proposal of an LLC-layer algorithm that can be implemented on both AP and WSs • The algorithm aims at guaranteeing fair access to the medium to every user, by awarding longer transmission opportunities to WSs that experienced short channel failures

  6. This paper… (cont’d) • The award mechanism works by monitoring the successful medium accesses over a measurement window, and allowing short or long bursts depending on the WS’s history

  7. Reference Scenario • Network and Traffic • Network scenario • Given N wireless stations • N/2 TCP connections in the uplink direction • N/2 TCP connections in the downlink direction

  8. Network scenario Data rate = 11 Mbps

  9. Reference Scenario (cont’d) • Channel Model • An independent error model for each communicating pair of nodes was introduced • An error model is represented by a three-state discrete-time Markov chain

  10. Three-state Error Model Long Bad GOOD Short Bad

  11. Goals of the Scheduling Algorithm • Improve the fairness among wireless stations that may experience location-dependent channel capacity and errors • Provide short-term fairness to TCP traffic in order to enhance the performance of short-lived flows

  12. Scheduling Algorithm Description • At the AP LLC layer, we introduce a separate queue for each WS associated to the AP, while only one queue is implemented at the WS LLC layer • A channel condition estimator is associated to each queue, and transmission is allowed only for the those queues whose channel is estimated to begood

  13. Scheduling Algorithm Description (cont’d) • Upon switching to good channel state, • A queue that has just experienced a bad channel is rewarded with the possibility to send to the MAC layer a maximum number of back-to-back frame (TXburst), • proportional to its forced silence period • The MAC layer will then use the EDCF bursting capability of the current 802.11e draft, to avoid contentions within the burst

  14. Scheduling Algorithm • 1) channel state estimation • 2) queue selection and service • 3) TXburst length setting

  15. Channel State Estimation • Channel State – GOOD • AP receives • A MAC-layer acknowledgment in response to a data frame • A CTS frame in response to an RTS frame • An error-free data frame or RTS

  16. Channel State Estimation (cont’d) • Channel State – BAD • The AP sets the flag to BAD after a transmission failure • The Long Retry Counter (LRC) is incremented when the transmission of a frame longer than the RTS threshold fails due to channel errors • When LRC (SRC) reaches the LRL value, the MAC layer abandons the transmission of the frame and it signals the failure to the LLC layer

  17. Channel State Estimation (cont’d) • Channel State – BAD (cont’d) • We can assume that it is highly like that values of SRC larger than 4 are due to channel errors SRL = 4 LRL = 0

  18. Channel State Estimation (cont’d) • Channel State – PROBE • The AP switches the flag from BAD to PROBE when a configurable value (PTIMER) expires • PTIMER starts to run whenever the channel state switches to BAD • The initial value is doubled (PROBE->BAD) • The value is reset (PROBE->GOOD) • A WS whose queue flag has a PROBE value can transmit a single data frame (RTS) to check the new channel state

  19. Queue Selection Service

  20. Queue Selection Selection NO YES

  21. TXburst Length Setting • The AP has first to compute a fair target throughput (Thr_Fair), that is the throughput value representing the fair service that each WS must receive at a given time (WinLen)

  22. TXburst Length Setting (cont’d) • In order to allow WSs stations to apply the same “controlled” bursty transmission , they need the Thr_Fair value estimated by the AP • Since WSs cannot compute the achieved global throughput • The AP must include the Thr_Fair in control frames that are broadcast on the WLAN (for example, in the Beacon Frame)

  23. tstat- http://tstat.tlc.polito.it/

  24. Simulation Scenario • Simulations run under the ns-2 simulator • Using ON-OFF source • The average duration of the OFF period is a configurable parameter • The ON duration depends on the amount of bytes to sent • Uniformly chosen among the ones reported in Table III

  25. Simulation Scenario (cont’d) • Transport-layer settings • TCP version is NewReno • The Max. Segment Size (MSS) of TCP segment is equal to 1000 bytes • Data Link-layer settings • Set the RTS threshold at 400 bytes so that TCP ACKs are never using the RTS/CTS handshaking • LLC queue at AP are 400 data frames long at AP

  26. Up/Down Flow Throughput Ratio From : Understanding TCP Fairness over Wireless LAN (INFOCOM 2003)

  27. Numerical Results • Factors • TCP segment Size • WinLen size • Fixed or Dynamic TXburst • Average Off Duration (Traffic Load) • Error Probability

  28. Average per-connection Throughput

  29. 3-Downlink (0-2) vs. 3-Uplink (3-5)

  30. Average Throughput of Uplink Connection Average duration of TCP source OFF period = 1s

  31. Average Throughput of Connection with Different Segments Size

  32. Fairness Index for Different Segments Size 0.7 0.1

  33. 27-Segment Flow Fairness Index

  34. Average Connection Completion Time

  35. Average Throughput under Different Traffic Load N = 20 Heavy Load

  36. Average per-connection Throughput

  37. Fairness Index for Different Segments Size

  38. Conclusions • It silences WSs while the channel is unavailable and uses a burst award mechanism to compensate for the missed transmission opportunities • It is highly beneficial for short-lived TCP flows, that normally suffer from losses on their early windows when competing with long-lived flows on a congested link

  39. My Comments • LLC-layer Algorithm, not MAC-layer Algorithm • In 802.11e draft, a TSPEC describes the QoS characteristics of a traffic stream, it can reserve resources within the HC and modify the HC’s scheduling behavior • Delay Bound • Minimum Burst Size • Service Interval

More Related