An Opportunistic Uplink Scheduling Scheme to

Achieve Bandwidth Fairness and Delay for

Multiclass Traffic in Wi-Max (IEEE 802.16)
Broadband Wireless Networks

Hemant Kumar Rath, Abhijeet Bhorkar, Vishal Sharma

Dept. of Electrical Engg., IIT-Bombay
{hemantr,bhorkar,vsharma@ee.iitb.ac.in}

IEEE Globecom – 2006

San Francisco, CA

©Copyright 2005-2006
All Rights Reserved
 Motivation

 Request-grant mechanisms, service types defined

in std.
 Request is either in Contention mode or Contention free
(Polling) mode
 Service types need QoS in terms of delay guarantees

 Scheduling mechanisms are not defined

 Scheduling in both uplink and downlink is open
 Providers/vendors can have their own scheduling algos.

 Scheduling mechanism must balance....

 Fairness in bandwidth alloc. with delay guarantees

©Copyright 2005-2006 2
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved
 Motivation (cont’d)

 Polling mode
 Poll each SS in every frame or in every k frames

 Polling interval k is a function of

 Delay tolerance Td
• UGS: 10ms, rtPS: 50ms, nrtPS: 200ms, BE: 500ms
 Fairness measure
 System efficiency

 Provider selects k to balance efficiency & fairness

 k may depend upon class of traffic

©Copyright 2005-2006 3
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved
 Uplink Scheduling Scheme

R
eq
ue

st s
SS4 st SS1
s

ue
G

nt s
Req
ra
n

Gra
ts
Requests Requests

Grants Grants

SS3 SS2
BS

©Copyright 2005-2006 4
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved
 Optimum Polling Interval k

 Polling mode
 BS polls each SS every k frames
 Worst case fairness is better if polled in every frame
 Normalized delay is better if polled in some k frames

 Design problem is to find an optimum k

 Approach: Minimize weighted sum of

 Normalized delay
 Worst case fairness in bandwidth allocation

©Copyright 2005-2006 5
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved
 Opportunistic Scheduling

SINR1 q1(t)
SS1
SINR2 d1(t)

BS q2(t)
SS2
SINRk d2(t)
Scheduler

qk(t)
SSk
BS takes into account dk(t)
 Channel characteristics [ SINR1 , SINR2 , SINRk ]
 Queue lengths [q1 (t ), q2 (t ), qk (t )]
 Delay counters [d1 (t ), d 2 (t ), d k (t )] at scheduling instant, based on COS

©Copyright 2005-2006 6
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved
 Opportunistic Deficit Round Robin
(O-DRR)

 Channel is static in a frame interval

 Slot assignment is opportunistic

 Assign slots only if channel is good and flow is active

 DRR variant for slot assignment

 Use queue state, delay requirements and lag/lead info.

 Works for single- and multi-class traffic

 SS with large Td relinquishes resources to SS with small Td

©Copyright 2005-2006 7
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved
 O-DRR Uplink Scheduling

SS6 SS1
SS2

SS5

Scheduling Scheduling Scheduling SS3

Instant Instant Instant
SS4

Tf

kTf
Scheduling Scheduling Scheduling
Epoch Epoch Epoch

©Copyright 2005-2006 8
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved
 Scheduling Multiclass Traffic

 Number of slots assigned to an SS depends upon

 Delay counter
• How close a HOL packet is to its delay bound
• Weight is more if it closer to the delay limit

d i  Td ( i )  nT f
 Deficit counter
• Weight is more if the deficit counter is high

 Weights w
  1/delay counter
  deficit counter

©Copyright 2005-2006 9
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved
 O-DRR Uplink Scheduling

d1=10, d2=30, d3=25, d4=20 SS1 SS2

SS6
SS1=28, SS2=6, SS4=15, SS6=11

Schedule: weights (wi)

and lag/lead counter
Schedulable Set SS5

{SS1,SS2 ,SS4, SS6} SS3

SS4

Tf

kTf
Scheduling
Epoch
Eligible Set
{SS1, SS2, SS4, SS6}
SINRi > SINRth & Backlogged

©Copyright 2005-2006 10
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved
 O-DRR Uplink Scheduling

d1=10, d2=30, SS1 SS2

SS6
d3=25, d4=20
SS1=23, SS2=5,
d1=5, d2=25
SS4=13, SS6=9
SS1=46, SS2=14
Sch Set SS5
Sch Set
{SS1,SS2,
{SS1,SS2} SS3
SS4,SS6} SS4

Tf

kTf
Scheduling
Epoch
Eligible Set
{SS1, SS2, SS4, SS6}
SINRi > SINRth
& Backlogged
©Copyright 2005-2006 11
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved
 O-DRR Uplink Scheduling

SS6 SS1
SS2

Sch Set
{SS1,SS2, Sch Set Sch Set SS5

SS4, SS6} {SS1,SS2} {SS2,SS6} SS3

SS4

Tf

kTf
Scheduling
Epoch
Eligible Set
{SS1, SS2, SS4 , SS6}
SINRi > SINRth
& Backlogged
©Copyright 2005-2006 12
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved
 O-DRR Uplink Scheduling

SS1
SS6 SS2

SS5

SS3
SS4

Tf

kTf
Scheduling Scheduling
Epoch Epoch
Eligible Set Eligible Set
{SS1, SS2, SS4, SS6} {SS2, SS3, SS4, SS6}
SINRi > SINRth
& Backlogged
©Copyright 2005-2006 13
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved
 Simulation Setup

 No. of users = 100

 No. of classes = 2
 k = 75, 100

 All flows backlogged (heavy traffic assumption)

 Delay requirements
 Class1 = 200ms
 Class2 = 500ms

 Total no. of frames scheduled = 2000

 Uplink slots per frame = 100

 Drop packets only if delay is violated

©Copyright 2005-2006 14
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved
 Fairness and Throughput

 O-DRR is fair
 Fair among users
• Max. difference in allocated bandwidth < 10 % of average
 Fair among traffic classes
• Both class1 and class2 traffic get almost equal number of slots
 As k increases, fairness decreases (intuitively expected)

©Copyright 2005-2006 15
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved
 Delay Performance

 Meets delay guarantees of different classes of traffic

 Packets are dropped only if delay is violated
 Packet drop is less than 8.5% for both classes of traffic
 For larger k, the dropping percentage is higher
• For worst case k=100, 91.5% of traffic meets its delay

©Copyright 2005-2006 16
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved
 Choosing Polling Interval k

 Jain’s fairness index is

more than 95%
 A series of k are tested for
fairness

 Possible to trade off

fairness for delay

 Appropriate k to satisfy
• Fairness & bandwidth
requirements

©Copyright 2005-2006 17
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved
 Discussion

 Low complexity scheduling algorithm

 The scheduling is done in the MAC layer

 It is a cross layer scheduling scheme involving PHY and
MAC layer

 Jain's fairness index remains above 90%

 It is possible to tradeoff fairness for delay

 O-DRR ensures delay requirements of users

©Copyright 2005-2006 18
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved
 Future Work

 Multi-rate users (SSs) based on channel condition

 Adaptive to channel condition where SS can select a
particular modulation scheme and data rate

 Effect of location-dependent channel variations

 Stability analysis of the individual queues

©Copyright 2005-2006 19
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved
©Copyright 2005-2006
All Rights Reserved
 Example of O-DRR Scheme
 Assumptions
 Total no of slots = 60
 Number of users = 6
 Per user (quantum) = 10
 Tf= 5, K = 3

SS Cl SNR Qstate DRR Lag/Lead di Wi Slots Lag/Lead

Flag (before) assigned (after)

1 1 31 1 1 30 10 0.46 28 12

2 2 30 1 1 20 30 0.10 6 24
3 1 20 1 0 -35 20 0.0 0 -25

4 2 35 1 1 40 25 0.25 15 35

5 1 23 1 0 15 18 0.0 0 25

6 2 32 1 1 23 20 0.18 11 22

Scheduling Epoch1, Scheduling Instant1

©Copyright 2005-2006 21
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved
 Example of O-DRR Scheme

SS Cl SNR Qstate DRR Lag/Lead di wi Slots Lag/Lead

Flag (before) assigned (after)
12
1 1 31 32 1 1 1 10 5 0.77 46 -24

24
2 2 30 34 1 1 1 10 25 0.23 14 20
-25
3 1 20 22 1 0 0 10 15 0 0 -15
35
4 2 35 25 1 1 0 10 20 0 0 45
25
5 1 23 24 1 0 0 10 13 0 0 35
22
6 2 32 21 1 1 0 20 15 0 0 32

Scheduling Epoch1, Scheduling Instant2

©Copyright 2005-2006 22
IEEE Globecom-2006, NXG-02: Broadband Access
All Rights Reserved