Qos Provided by The Ieee 802.11 Wireless Lan To Advanced Data Applications: A Simulation Analysis
Qos Provided by The Ieee 802.11 Wireless Lan To Advanced Data Applications: A Simulation Analysis
Qos Provided by The Ieee 802.11 Wireless Lan To Advanced Data Applications: A Simulation Analysis
_
,
x 0
[1]
where
> 0
and
> 0
are real, and are called shape and scale parameters, respectively.
Furthermore, the average
E X [ ]
and variance
X
2
are
E X [ ]
_
,
1
[2]
X
2
2
2
2
2 1 1
_
,
_
,
1
]
1
'
[3]
Workshop on Nomadic Computing
Geneva (CH) - April 5, 1997
- 8 -
where
z t e dt
z t
( )
1
0
.
From [1] it is easy to check that when
1
the Weibull distribution is reduced to an
exponential distribution.
3.2 Performance Measures
In this section we introduce the performance measures (or indices) used to characterize
the quality of service (QoS) a station attached to an IEEE 802.11 can achieve. The indices
defined in our analysis to specify the QoS are a widely accepted, minimum set of
performance measures used to characterize the performance of any computer network.
Before introducing the performance measures we observe that messages are queued in a
station local queue as soon as they arrive. Therefore, except when the station is empty, a
message will experience some delay in the local queue before contending for the channel
according to the IEEE 802.11 MAC protocol. With this in mind, the performance
measures we use in our analysis are:
- average queuing delay: time elapsed from the time a message joins the local queue up
until it reaches the head of the local queue itself: i.e., it starts contending for the
channel;
- average MAC delay: the average delay experienced by a message from the time it
reaches the head of the local queue up until the beginning of its successfull
transmission. The rationale behind this choice is that the average MAC delay measures
the delay caused by the MAC protocol, and thus measures the interference between a
user on one station and the users on the other stations. Furthermore, the average MAC
delay does not include the average queueing delay experienced by a message while
queued in the local node queue, i.e., it does not take into account the interference
between users on the same station;
- average access delay: sum of the mean MAC delay and the mean queueing delay in the
local queue;
- aggregate throughput: average number of bits successfully transmitted by all stations
per time unit.
Workshop on Nomadic Computing
Geneva (CH) - April 5, 1997
- 9 -
3.3 Operation Parameter Setting and Assessment Scenarios
The system parameters for our simulation environment are reported in Table 1. These
values are specified in the IEEE 802.11 standard [IEEE95]. Traffic related parameters are
reported in Table 2. Specifically, the station offered load value of 30 Kbit/sec was chosen
to cover a broad range of data services while the ON and OFF durations, although
different from the values in [Deng96], allow reasonable execution times for simulation
experiments without altering the stochastic nature of the arrival process.
System Parameter Parameter Value (sec)
Slot-time 50
SIFS 28
DIFS 128
(SIFS+2Slot-time)
Medium Capacity 1 Mbit/sec
Table 1: System parameter values
Traffic Parameter Parameter Value
Station Offered Load 30 Kbits/sec
Average ON duration 3.3 sec
Average OFF duration 22.8 sec
Table 2: Traffic parameter values
4.0 Simulation Results
In this section we report and comment on, in terms of MAC protocol mechanisms, the
simulation results we obtained with the arrival processes and operation parameter settings
previously specified. Furthermore, we report results which show the sensitivity of the
IEEE 802.11 MAC protocol to larger cell coverage and higher channel speeds.
4.1 Influence of the Arrival Process with RTS/CTS Disabled
In most of the curves reported below we compare Poisson, MMPP and ON/OFF
processes where ON/OFF durations are Weibull distributed with several coefficients of
variation (i.e., values). Furthermore, we also varied the interarrival packet time
distribution during ON periods. Specifically, we considered, in addition to the
exponential distribution, the Weibull and constant distributions. The results obtained were
substantially the same. For this reason, in most of the following experiments the
interarrival packet time distribution is taken as being exponential.
Workshop on Nomadic Computing
Geneva (CH) - April 5, 1997
- 10 -
Figure 3 shows the aggregate throughput achieved by the IEEE 802.11 vs the number of
data sources. This figure highlights that the throughput curves which refer to the various
arrival data processes are very close to each other.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 5 10 15 20 25
Poisson
a=1.0
a=0.88
a=0.70
a=0.65
A
g
g
r
e
g
a
t
e
T
h
r
o
u
g
h
p
u
t
(
k
b
i
t
/
s
e
c
)
Number of stations
(MMPP)
Figure 3: Aggregate throughput vs the number of data sources for different arrival
processes.
0
200
400
600
800
1000
0 5 10 15 20
Poisson
a=1.0
a=0.88
a=0.70
a=0.65
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
A
c
c
e
s
s
D
e
l
a
y
(
m
s
e
c
)
Number of stations
(MMPP)
Figure 4: Average access delay vs the number of data sources for different arrival
processes.
Workshop on Nomadic Computing
Geneva (CH) - April 5, 1997
- 11 -
The situation is very different from the average access delay standpoint shown in Figure
4. This figure shows that the more the ON/OFF duration distributions deviate from the
exponential one (i.e., the more heavily tailed the distribution is) the worse the average
access delay. In order to understand the reasons for this behaviour we measured both
components of the average access delay. Figure 5 reports the average MAC delay and the
average queuing delay versus the number of stations for several values of .
0
200
400
600
800
1000
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
4 6 8 10 12 14
a=0.88
a=070
a=0.65
a=0.88
a=0.70
a=0.65
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
Q
u
e
u
i
n
g
D
e
l
a
y
(
m
s
e
c
)
Number of stations
Queueing
delay
MAC
delay
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
M
A
C
D
e
l
a
y
(
m
s
e
c
)
Figure 5: Average MAC delay and average queuing delay versus the number of stations
for several values of .
From the above figure it clearly emerges that the average MAC delay remains constant in
the range of values we considered and this means that the collision avoidance
mechanism is not influenced by the burstiness of the arrival process. By contrast, the
average queueing delay increases significantly when the values decrease. This
behaviour is certainly due to the fact that when the ON periods are distributed according
to a heavy tail distribution the probability of the occurrence of long ON periods is not
negligible and hence the probability of having a long local queue is not negligible either.
The influence of the value on the system performances is now clear. In the following,
in order to achieve reasonable execution times for simulation experiments, we will always
use the exponential distritibution (i.e., 1 ) for the OFF and ON durations. In other
words, the arrival process will be assumed to be MMPP.
Workshop on Nomadic Computing
Geneva (CH) - April 5, 1997
- 12 -
4.2 Influence of the Arrival Process with RTS/CTS Enabled
The purpose of this section is to analyze whether or not there exists an optimal RTS
threshold for the type of traffic we consider. Figure 6 shows a comparison between the
aggregate throughputs achieved by the IEEE 802.11 vs the number of data sources in the
cases in which the RTS/CTS mechanism is disabled and enabled and, in the latter case,
for different RTS threshold values. Specifically, the values selected are 0 (which means
RTS/CTS mechanism always enabled), 150 bytes and 280 bytes. This choice can be
understood by making reference to the left bump in the pmf reported in Figure 2.
Obviously, 150 bytes falls in the middle and 280 on the right side of the above mentioned
bump.
0
200
400
600
800
1000
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Thresh. = 0 bytes
Thresh. = 150 bytes
Thresh. = 280 bytes
RTS/CTS Disabled
A
g
g
r
e
g
a
t
e
T
h
r
o
u
g
h
p
u
t
(
K
b
i
t
/
s
e
c
)
Number of stations
Figure 6: Aggregate throughputs when the RTS/CTS mechanism is enabled (for different
threshold values) and disabled.
As shown in Figure 7, the RTS/CTS protocol mechanism significantly influences the
average access delay for any RTS threshold value. This figure highlights two important
aspects:
- the RTS/CTS mechanism improves the average access delay with respect to the case in
which RTS/CTS is disabled;
- when the RTS/CTS mechanism is enabled, the influence of the RTS threshold value on
the average access delay is almost negligible although it can be observed that the
average access delay decreases when the RTS threshold value decreases.
Workshop on Nomadic Computing
Geneva (CH) - April 5, 1997
- 13 -
The latter point can be easily understood by taking into consideration that, due to the
shape of the packet size pmf (see Figure 2):
- by lowering the RTS threshold value, the number of packets affected by the RTS/CTS
mechanism increases, however
- the improvement in the RTS/CTS mechanism is very strong for packets belonging to the
right bump (packets with very large packet sizes) while it is moderate or even low for
packets falling in the left bump (packets with small to medium packet sizes). Hence,
the improvement in the access delay performance of the RTS/CTS mechanism is not
significantly affected by the positioning of the threshold within the left bump.
0
200
400
600
800
1000
0 5 10 15 20
Thresh. = 0 bytes
Thresh. = 150 bytes
Thresh. = 280 bytes
RTS/CTS Disabled
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
A
c
c
e
s
s
D
e
l
a
y
(
m
s
e
c
)
Number of stations
Figure 7: Average access delay when the RTS/CTS mechanism is enabled (for different
threshold values) and disabled.
To further deepen the influence of the RTS threshold value on the average access delay
performance we investigated other packet length distributions. Specifically, for the
uniform and exponential distributions with the same average as the distribution reported
in Figure 2, we observed the same behaviour: i.e., the threshold value does not affect
significantly the access delay protocol performance.
Workshop on Nomadic Computing
Geneva (CH) - April 5, 1997
- 14 -
4.3 Influence of the Slot-time Duration
As highlighted in Section 2.2, the slot duration depends upon the maximum size of the
cell coverage. Figures 8 and 9 report the throughput and average access delay vs the
number of stations for several cell sizes expressed in terms of slot durations.
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
0 5 10 15 20
50 sec
100 sec
200 sec
300 sec
A
g
g
r
e
g
a
t
e
T
h
r
o
u
g
h
p
u
t
(
K
b
i
t
/
s
e
c
)
Number of stations
Figure 8: Influence of the slot-time duration on the aggregate throughput.
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
0 5 10 15 20
50 sec
100 sec
200 sec
300 sec
A
v
e
r
a
g
e
A
c
c
e
s
s
D
e
l
a
y
(
m
s
e
c
)
Number of stations
Figure 9: Influence of the slot-time duration on the average access delay.
Workshop on Nomadic Computing
Geneva (CH) - April 5, 1997
- 15 -
Figure 8 shows that the maximum achievable throughput decreases when the slot
duration increases. Furthermore, from Figure 9 it follows that the average access delay,
for a given number of stations, increases when the slot duration increases. This can be
explained by taking into consideration that an increase in the slot duration results in: i) an
increase in the DIFS and hence in the average backoff period; and ii) an increase in the
number of collisions, as shown in Table 3.
Slot-time Duration
Number
of
Stations
50 sec 100 sec 200 sec 300 sec
13 0.19 0.20 0.23 0.26
16 0.28 0.31 0.35 0.50
19 0.56 0.81 1.05 1.12
Table 3: Mean number of collisions versus slot-time duration for three different numbers
of stations.
The latter effect can be explained by considering that the vulnerable period (see Figure 10)
of the collision avoidance algorithm implemented by the IEEE 802.11 MAC protocol has
a duration equal to the slot time. This can be understood by analyzing Figure 10 which
shows a scenario in which the backoff time of a station (called reference station) expires
at time t
0
. Due to the propagation delay, any other stations for which the backoff expires
in between half of a slot before and after t
0
(stations 1 and 2 respectively - see Figure 10)
will collide with the reference station.
Vulnerable
period
(1 slot-time)
backoff
backoff1
backoff2
Reference station
Station 1
Station 2
t0
t2
t1
Figure 10:Vulnerable period.
Workshop on Nomadic Computing
Geneva (CH) - April 5, 1997
- 16 -
4.4 Analysis at Higher Speeds
As attention is now turning towards wireless LANs which can support several tens of
megabit per second, we broadened our analysis to verify whether or not the IEEE 802.11
MAC protocol is suitable for managing these rates efficiently.
We estimated the aggregate throughput versus the number of stations for channel speeds
of 1, 2, 5, and 10 Mbit/sec. The results obtained show that the number of stations for
which the maximum aggregate throughput occurs does not increase proportionally to the
channel speed. This is due to the fact that when the channel speed increases, the message
transmission time decreases proportionally. However, since the slot time, and hence the
backoff time, remains unchanged with the increase of the channel speed, the portion of
time during which the channel remains unused due to the backoff algorithm is the same at
any speed.
0.25
0.3
0.35
0.4
0.45
0.5
0.55
0 2 4 6 8 10
P
r
o
t
o
c
o
l
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y
Medium Capacity (Mbit/sec)
Figure 11: Protocol capacity vs. different speed rates
Figure 11 plots the IEEE 802.11 MAC protocol capacity (i.e., the maximum fraction of
channel bandwidth used by successfully transmitted messages over all possible offered
loads) for 1, 2, 5, and 10 Mbit/sec. As can be seen, the protocol capacity decreases when
the channel speed increases. This implies that: i) the IEEE 802.11 is not adequate to
support the channel speeds planned for the future generation of wireless ATM LANs; and
ii) the protocol capacity depends upon the ratio (denoted by a in the literature - see
[Cont96]) between the packet transmission speed and the medium propagation time. The
Workshop on Nomadic Computing
Geneva (CH) - April 5, 1997
- 17 -
latter property should be expected since the IEEE 802.11 MAC protocol belongs to the
class of random access MAC protocols which exhibit a similar dependency.
5.0 Summary and Conclusions
In this paper we have performed a simulation analysis of the IEEE 802.11 MAC protocol
proposed for wireless LANs. This analysis is based on realistic traffic models which
are in line with those derived for modern data network applications (e.g., WWW).
From the above analysis we can conclude that when the number of stations is in the order
of 15, the IEEE 802.11 behavior is satisfactory. Under this condition, the IEEE 802.11
resource-sharing distributed algorithm results in an access delay experienced by each
station in the order of one second (in our experiments) when the RTS/CTS is disabled,
and approximately one third of second when the RTS/CTS mechanism is enabled. This is
a boundary which seems to be acceptable for today's data services.
Furthermore, at least for the type of traffic we consider, results obtained suggest using an
RTS threshold equal to zero; i.e., to enable the RTS/CTS protocol mechanism for any
message length.
Finally, the IEEE 802.11 MAC protocol is not suitable for managing data traffic at
channel speeds higher than a few megabit/sec.
References
[Bell] Trace retrived via anonymous ftp from bellcore.flash.com, file
/pub/lan_traffic/pAug.TL. No longer available.
[Chha96] H. S. Chhaya, S. Gupta, Performance of Asynchronous Data Transfer
Methods of IEEE 802.11 MAC Protocol, IEEE Personal
Communications, October 1996, Vol. 3, No 5.
[Cont96] M. Conti, E. Gregori, L. Lenzini, Metropolitan Area Networks,
Springer 1996.
[Crov95] M. E. Crovella, A. Bestavros, Explaining World Wide Web Traffic Self-
Similarity, Computer Science Dept., Boston University, Technical Report
TR95-015, August 29, 1995.
Workshop on Nomadic Computing
Geneva (CH) - April 5, 1997
- 18 -
[Deng96] S. Deng, Empirical Model of WWW Document Arrivals at Access Link,
Proceedings of ICC 96.
[Heff86] H. Heffes. D. M. Lucantoni, A Markov Modulated Characterization of
Packetized Voice and Data Traffic and Related Statistical Multiplexer
Performance, IEEE JSAC, vol. SAC-4, No. 6, September 1986.
[ETSI95] ETSI, Hiperlan Functional Specification, ETSI Draft Standard, July 1995.
[IEEE95] P802.11/D2.1, Draft Standard IEEE 802.11, Wireless LAN Medium
Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications, 4
December 1995.
[Guse91] R. Gusella, Characterizing the Variability of Arrival Processes with
Indexes of Dispersion, IEEE JSAC, vol. SAC-9, No. 2, February 1991.
[LaMa95] R. O. LaMaire, A. Krishna, J. Panian, and P. Bhagwat, Wireless LANs
and Mobile Networking: Standards and Future Directions, IBM
Corporation, December 22, 1995.
[Lela94] W. E. Leland, M. S. Taqqu, W. Willinger, D. V. Wilson, "On the Self-
Similar Nature of Ethernet Traffic", IEEE/ACM Transactions on
Networking, Vol. 2, No 1, pp. 1-15, February 1994.
[Viss95] M. A. Visser, M. El Zarki, Voice and Data transmission over an 802.11
Wireless network, Proceedings of PIMRC 95.
[Wein97] J. Weinmiller, M. Schlager, A. Festag, A. Wolisz, Performance Study of
Access Control in Wirelles LANs - IEEE 802.11 DFWMAC and ETSI
RES 10 HIPERLAN, To appear on ACM/Baltzer Wireless Network,
1997.
[Will95] W. Willinger, M. S. Taqqu, R. Sherman, D. V. Wilson, Self-Similarity
through High Variability Statistical Analysis of Ethernet LAN Traffic at the
Source Level, Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM 95, pp. 100-113, 1995.