View
214
Download
0
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
A Hierarchical Model for Bandwidth Management and Admission Control in
Integrated IEEE 802.16&802.11 Wireless Networks
Dusit Niyato and Ekram Hossain
IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC), March 2007
報告者:李宗穎
2
Outline
Introduction System Model and Assumptions Bandwidth Allocation Admission Control Performance Evaluation Conclusion
3
Introduction
This paper present a hierarchical bandwidth management and admission control framework for integrated IEEE 802.16/802.11 wireless networks
Related works considered connections only from standalone subscriber stations
4
Network Model
two-level hierarchical model first level a bargaining game between the set of
standalone SSs and the WLAN APs second level, connections corresponding to the
different service types in the standalone SSs
5
IEEE 802.11/16 AP/wireless router
Paper assume that the dual radio interface at a 802.11/802.16 AP/wireless router uses different frequency bands
Data packets corresponding to local and Internet traffic are stored in separate queues
6
Uplink Transmission in the IEEE 802.16 Air Interface Paper consider a single BS with multiple connecti
ons from SSs using the TDMA/TDD access mode
Bi : burst sizeRi : transmission rate for any connection i in a frameC : channel bandwidthIn : the number of transmitted bits per symbol for AMC state nPrn : the probability of using AMC state nF : frame size
7
Hierarchical Model for Bandwidth Management
Paper use sigmoid utility function which represents quantitatively the satisfaction on received transmission rate R
8
Bargaining Game (1/3) The average transmission rate for the group
s of standalone SS and WLAN connections can be obtained from
γSS, γWL, NSS, NWL denote the average SNR and the total number of standalone SSs and WLAN APs/routers
9
Bargaining Game (2/3)
The utilities for these groups of connections φSS(ΣBSS) = U(RSS(ΣBSS))
φWL(ΣBWL) = U(RWL(ΣBWL))
If an agreement between both the players in the game cannot be reached, the utility that the players will receive is given by the threat point
is the threat point for this bargaining game
10
Bargaining Game (3/3)
The equilibrium strategy of this game refers to the set of strategies for which all the players are satisfied with their received payoff
[8] S. Chae and P. Heidhues, “A group bargaining solution, ” Elsevier Mathematical Social Sciences, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 37-53, 2005.
11
N-Person Game in Coalition Form (1/2)
define a finite set A of players (i.e., A = {UGS,PS,BE})
the required burst size for service type (i.e., player) j can be obtained from
λ(j) is the bandwidth requirementN(j) is the number of connections in service type j from standalone SSs
SS
SS
12
N-Person Game in Coalition Form (2/2)
A coalition S is defined as a subset of A, S ⊂ A
The coalition form of an N-person game is defined by the pair (A, ν) where ν is a characteristic function of the game
13
Shapley Value
the value function φ(ν) as the worth or value of player j in the game with characteristic function ν
The Shapley value φ = [φ1,…,φi,…,φn] can be computed as follows
[9] L. S. Shapley, “A value for N-Person game, ” Annals of Mathematics Studies, Princeton University Press, vol. 2, pp. 307-317, 1953
14
Admission Control of Connections in Standalone SSs (1/2)
For connections in service type j, the burst size allocated to connection k depends on the channel quality as follows
15
Admission Control of Connections in Standalone SSs (2/2)
a new connection in service type j arrives, the 802.16 BS decides whether this connection can be accepted or not by considering the change in total utility
a new connection is accepted only when the total utility increases, and rejected otherwise
16
Admission Control of WLAN Nodes
This WLAN initial message contains the bandwidth requirement of the new connection
If the link between the AP and the 802.16 BS lacks sufficient bandwidth, the BS performs bandwidth reallocation among standalone SSs and WLAN APs
17
Transmission Rate in WLAN
in the saturated case, the estimated received bandwidth is obtained as follows
λ(j) (k) : the bandwidth requirement of connection k in WLAN j, CWL : the channel rate in the WLANPs : the measured probability of successful transmission
WL
18
Formulation of the Admission Control Game for WLAN (1/2)
The burst size allocated to WLAN connection j depends on the channel quality as follows
19
Formulation of the Admission Control Game for WLAN (2/2)
The payoff for the case when a new connection is accepted can be obtained as follows
A new connection from node k in WLAN j is accepted if for WMAN and WLAN the pure strategy (accept, accept) is a Nash equilibrium
20
Parameter Setting
Transmission Mode TDMA
Transmission bandwidth 25 MHz
Frame size 1 ms
Cell size 5 km
Average receive SNR 7 ~ 26 dB
UGS, PS, BE 400/500/300 kbps
WLAN channel rate 10 Mbps
WLAN cell radius 50 meters
WLAN bandwidth 400 kbps
21
Variation of Allocated Bandwidth Under Different Channel Qualities
22
Variation of Total Utility of Standalone SSs
the number of PS and BE connections is 15 and 20
23
Performance of Admission Control Method for WLANs
24
Conclusions
A bargaining game has been used to determine the optimal burst size for WMAN and WLAN connections
The Shapley value has been used to obtain the solution of the bandwidth allocation problem for different types of WMAN connections
An admission control scheme based on variation in total utility has been presented
Recommended