802.

16 MAC Layer Scheduling and its Effect on TCP

performance
Professor Thong Nguyen
University of Technology Sydney (UTS)
AUSTRALIA

1. 802.16 MAC Layer

Service Data Unit (SDU): Data units exchanged between adjacent protocol layers
Protocol Data Unit (PDU): Data units exchanged between peer entities. e.g. MAC
PDU is the data unit exchanged between the MAC layers of a BS and its SSs.

Sender

Receiver

Packet

Packet
CS SAP

MAC

SDU

Service-Specific
Convergence Sublayers

SDU

MAC SAP
PDU

MAC Common Part

Sublayer

PDU

Privacy Sublayer

PHY

PHY SAP

PDU

PHY LAYER

Airlink
Figure 1.1: WiMAX Protocol Architecture

PDU

1.1 Service-Specific (Protocol) Convergence Sublayers (CS) (ATM CS, Packet

CS)
The WiMAX MAC protocol supports a variety of backhaul requirements including
both cell-based ATM and packet-based IP protocols (including 802.3/Ethernet). The
MAC Convergence Sublayers map the transport-layer-specific traffic to a MAC that is
flexible enough to efficiently carry any traffic type.
In the following, we describe only the Packet CS. This sublayer performs the
following functions relying on the service of the MAC CPS:
-

Classification of the higher-layer PDU (from BS host) into appropriate

WiMAX connection,
Suppression of payload header information (optional),
Delivery of the resulting CS PDU to the MAC SAP associated with the service
flow for transport to peer MAC SAP at the other end (e.g. SS end),
Receipt of CS PDU from the peer MAC SAP (only),
Rebuilding of any suppressed payload header information (optional)

An IP Packet PDU arrives at the WiMAXs MAC layer is called a MAC SDU.
Classification
Classification is a process by which a MAC SDU is mapped onto a particular
connection for transmission between MAC peers. The mapping process associates a
MAC SDU to a connection (with a CID) and to the service flow characteristics (i.e. a
list of QoS parameters) of that connection which provide the QoS for the packet.
A classifier is a set of matching criteria applied to each packet entering WiMAX
network. It consists of some protocol-specific packet matching criteria (e.g.
destination IP address), a priority, and a reference to a CID. If matched, the packet is
then delivered to the SAP for delivery to the connection identified by the CID.
Implementation of each specific classification capability (e.g. IPv4-based
classification) is optional. Several classifiers may refer to the same service flow. In
this case the classifier priority is used to order the application of classifiers to a
packet. Downlink classifiers are applied by the BS to packets it is transmitting, and
uplink classifiers are applied at the SS.
Priority of Classification Parameters
service flow (encoded using type/length/value formatting scheme)
802.3
802.1P/Q
IPv4/v6
TCP/UDP
1 byte
TLV1
TLV2
TLV3
TLV4

CID
SFID
2 and
bytes

and
4

Figure 1.2: Classifier format

The 2-byte CID maps each 4-byte SFID to a connection. The TLV scheme adds a tag
to each transmitted value which contains the type and length of the encoded
parameter. The relevant parameters for CS Classifiers are:

TLV1 (Ethernet): destination and source addresses, Ethertype/SAP

TLV2 (802.1Q): Priority Range, VLAN ID
TLV3 (IP): ToS Range/Mask, Protocol, Source address/mask, Destination
address/mask
TLV4 (TCP/UDP): TCP/UDP source port start, TCP/UDP source port end, TCP/UDP
destination port start, TCP/UDP destination port end.

Figure 1.3a: Classification and CID mapping (BS to SS)

Figure 1.3b: Classification and CID mapping (SS to BS)

Packet Header Suppression (PHS)

Since WiMAX is a connection-oriented service, most of routing information in a
packet becomes redundant (i.e. repetitive) once the connection is set up, therefore the
Packet Convergence Sublayer also provides a packet header suppression (PHS)
mechanism in order to avoid the transmission of redundant information in the headers
of the MAC SDUs. The suppressed information is then restored at the receiver.
Implementation of the PHS capability is optional. If PHS is enabled at the MAC
connection, each MAC SDU is prefixed with a PHSI which references the Payload
Header Suppression Field (PHSF). The classifier uniquely maps a packet to its
associated PHS rule. Therefore when a classifier is deleted, any associated PHS rule
shall also be deleted. The receiver uses the CID and the PHSI to restore the PHSF.
The MAC SDU (i.e. the Packet PDU) can be processed as is (i.e. with header) if the
8-bit PHSI index =0, or it can be optionally added a PHSI 0 (i.e. without header).
PHS has a Payload Header Suppression Valid (PHSV) option for use to verify or not
verify the payload header before suppressing it. PHS also has a Payload Header
Suppression Mask (PHSM) option to allow select bytes not to be suppressed. The
PHSM facilitates suppression of header fields that remain static within a higher-layer
session (e.g. IP addresses), while enabling transmission of fields that change from
packet topacket (e.g. IP Total Length).
The BS shall assign all CID values and all PHSI values. Either sending or receiving
entity shall specify the PHSF and the Payload Header Suppression Size (PHSS). This
provision allows for preconfigured headers or for higher level protocols outside the
scope of WiMAX standards to establish cache entries.
SS to BS operation
A packet is submitted to the packet CS. The SS applies its list of Classifiers rules. A
mach of the rule shall result in an Uplink Service Flow, CID, and a PHS Rule. The
PHS Rule provides PHSF, PHSI, PHSM, PHSS, and PHSV. If PHSV is set or not
present, the SS shall compare the bytes in the packet header with the bytes in the
PHSF that are to be suppressed as indicated by the PHSM. The SS shall then prefix
the PDU with a PHSI to turn it into a MAC SDU to be presented to the MAC SAP for
transport on the Uplink.
At the BS, when the MAC PDU is received and the BS MAC layer shall determine
the associated CID by examining the generic MAC Header. The BS MAC layer sends
the PDUAC SAP associated with that CID. The BS (receiver) packet CS uses the
CID and the PSHI to look up PHSF, PHSM, and PHSS. The BS reassembles the
packet. If PHSV was not enabled, then there is no guarantee that the restored PHSF
bytes match the original header bytes.
A similar operation can be described for BS to SS downlink operation.
1.2 The MAC Common Part Sublayer (CPS)
The resulting CS PDU is then passed to corresponding (peer) MAC SAP. The MAC
CPS then adds a generic (WiMAX) MAC header and an optional CRC to the MAC

SDU (or CS PDU) to become a MAC PDU. Usually TCP traffic will arrive
encapsulated within an IP packet which in turn is encapsulated within an Ethernet
frame.

PHSI (optional)

Packet PDU
(a) A MAC SDU

e.g.
PHSI 0

IEEE802.3 PDU with Header suppressed

(b) An 802.3 CS PDU format with header suppression

Generic MAC Header

MAC SDU (CS PDU)

CRC (opt)

(c) An IEEE 802.16 MAC PDU format

Figure 1.4: Definition of MAC SDUand PDU
The CSs and the MAC CPS work together using payload header suppression,
packing, and fragmentation to carry traffic more efficiently than the original transport
mechanism.
Two general service-specific convergence sublayers are specified for mapping
services to and from WiMAX MAC connections:
The ATM convergence sublayer (support for VPath and VChannel switched
connections, ATM header suppression, end-to-end signaling of dynamically
created connections, full QoS), and
The packet convergence sublayer for mapping IP4, IP6 and Ethernet (payload
header suppression, full QoS)
The primary task of the sublayer is to classify SDUs to the proper MAC connection,
preserve or enable QoS, and enable bandwidth allocation, payload header suppression
and reconstruction.
Apart from the data coming from the convergence sublayers, the MAC layer also
reserves additional connections for other purposes: one connection for contentionbased initial access, one for broadcast transmissions in the DL as well as for signaling
broadcast contention-based polling of SS bandwidth requests, one or more for
multicast contention-based polling in which SSs may be instructed to join these
multicast polling groups.

1.3

Transmission Convergence (TC) Layer

Between the PHY and MAC layers is a TC sublayer which transforms variable-length
MAC PDUs into fixed-length FEC blocks (plus possibly a shortened FEC block, i.e. a
PAD, at the end of each burst). The TC PDU is sized to fit in the FEC block currently
being filled. It starts with a pointer byte at the start of the payload indicating where
the next MAC PDU header starts within the FEC block. This allows resynchronization to the next MAC PDU in the event that previous FEC block had
irrecoverable errors. The TC layer can be considered to be a sublayer of the PHY.

Pointer

MAC PDU that has started

in previous TC PDU

First MAC PDU of

this TC PDU

Second MAC PDU of

this TC PDU

Figure 1.5: TC sublayer PDU with MAC PDUs

Data bits coming from the TC sublayer are randomized, forward error correction
(FEC) encoded, and mapped to a QPSK or QAM signal constellation.

2. Transmission of MAC PDUs and SDUs

Connection and Connection ID: A unidirectional mapping between MAC peers over
the airlink (uniquely identified by a CID)
Service Flow and Service Flow ID (SFID): A unidirectional flow of MAC PDUs on
a connection that provides a particular QoS (uniquely identified by a SFID)
2.1

Transmission

MAC PDUs are transmitted in the PHY bursts each may carry many concatenated
MAC PDUs spanning over multiple FEC blocks. The FEC used in WiMAX is RS
GF(256) with variable block size and error correction capabilities. This is paired with
an inner block convolutional code to robustly transmit critical data such as frame
control and initial accesses.

Figure 2.1: MAC PDU Transmission in a PHY burst

2.2 MAC PDU Format

The WiMAX MAC layer provides intelligence such as dynamic bandwidth allocation
for the PHY layer to ensure that a number of QoS measures are satisfied. Dynamic
resource allocation is the most effective way to counter the degradation of wireless
services such as timing jitter and latency.
The DL MAC frame from the BS (Figure 3.??) starts with a preamble (P), followed by
a frame control header (FCH) which specifies the particular burst profile for the rest
of the frame since the bursts are transmitted with different modulation and coding
schemes. The FCH is followed by one or more DL bursts, each burst is transmitted
according to the profile specified in the header. The first DL burst is specified in the
DL frame prefix (DLFP).
The preamble, acting as a test sequence, allows the initial estimate of the channel.
While this can serve as an adaptive tracking of the channel, but because the frame
length is only 1 2ms, this feature is not necessary in fixed wireless applications
where the channel does not change much during a frame time.
The MAC layer of 802.16 was designed principally for PMP broadband wireless
access applications. The signaling and bandwidth allocation algorithms have been
designed for each BS to accommodate hundreds of SS each is shared by many end
users of different bandwidth and latency requirements. This requires the MAC
protocol to be flexible and efficient over a variety of traffic models, including TDM
voice and data, IP connectivity and VoIP.
The bandwidth request and grant mechanism has been designed to be scalable and
self-correcting. It can efficiently handle requests from multiple connections having
multiple QoS levels from each station.
The MAC is connection-oriented using 16-bit connection identifiers (CIDs) carried in
the MAC PDUs header and may requires continuously granted bandwidth during a
connection. A CID is used to distinguish between multiple UL channels that are
associated with the same DL channel. The SSs check the CIDs in the received MAC
PDUs and retain only those PDUs addressed to them. Similarly, SSs share the UL (to
the BS) on a demand basis.
MAC Header
The generic MAC header has a 6-byte fixed format. One or more MAC sub-headers
may be part of the payload. The presence of sub-headers is indicated by the Type
field in the generic MAC header.
Upon entering the network, the SS is assigned 3 management connections in each
direction:

Basic connection for short and critical MAC and RLC messages,
Primary management connection for longer and more delay-tolerant
messages such as authentication and connection setup. The secondary
management connection transfers standards-based messages such as DHCP,
TFTP, and SNMP.
Transport connections are unidirectional to facilitate different UL and DL
QoS and traffic parameters.
Each SS has a standard 48-bit IEEE MAC address, which serves as an equipment
identifier because the primary addresses used during operation are the CIDs. BS has
48-bit ID, not MAC address, of which is a 24-bit operator indicator.

Figure 2.2: Generic MAC header format (HT: header type, EC: encryption control,
EKS: encryption key sequence, CI: CRC indicator, CID: connection ID, HCS: header
check sequence)

Figure 2.3: Bandwidth Request Message (Header without a payload)

MAC Subheaders
Incoming MAC SDUs from corresponding convergence sublayers are re-formatted
according to the MAC PDU format, with necessary fragmentation and/or packing,
before being transmitted over one or more user connections in accordance with the
MAC protocols. On arriving at the peer MAC Layer at the receiver, MAC PDUs are
re-constructed back to the original MAC SDUs to be delivered to the MAC
Convergence Sublayers. WiMAX incorporates the fragmentation/packing process
with the bandwidth allocation process to maximize flexibility, efficiency, and
effectiveness of both processes.
Fragmentation is the process in which a MAC SDU is divided into many MAC SDU
fragments for transporting in multiple MAC PDUs. Each connection may be in only
one single-fragment state at any time. Packing is the process in which multiple MAC
SDUs are packed into a single MAC PDU payload. Either a BS or an SS may initiate
both processes. WiMAX allows simultaneous fragmentation and packing for efficient
use of bandwidth.
Except for bandwidth request MAC PDUs which contains no payload, MAC PDUs
contain either MAC management messages or convergence sublayer data, and
therefore have 3 types of MAC subheaders:

Grant management subheader for SS to convey bandwidth management

requests to the BS,
Fragmentation subheader (FSH) for information that indicates the
presence and orientation of any fragments of SDUs in the payload.
2-bit FC (Fragment Control): 00 unfragmented, 01 Last, 10 First, and 11
Continuing fragments.
3-bit FSN (Fragment Sequence Number): continuously counting across SDUs,
necessary to detect missing continuing fragments.
Packing subheader (PSH) 2-bytes, for information that indicates the
presence of packing of multiple SDUs into a single PDU. Obviously, on
connections with MAC SDUs having fixed length, no packing subheader is
required.

The grant management and fragmentation subheaders may be inserted in MAC PDUs
immediately following the generic header, and the packing subheader may be inserted
immediately before each MAC SDU; all these insertions will be indicated by the Type
field in the generic header. The use of subheaders can save up to 10% of system
bandwidth.

2. 3 Fragmentation and Packing of MAC SDUs

MAC PDU sublayer

Figure 2.4: Packing of variable-length MAC SDUs into one single MAC PDU

Figure 2.5: Packing with Fragmentation of MAC SDUs

3. TDD Frame Structure in PMP mode and Connection Set-up

Process

802.16 TDD Frame in PMP Mode

An FCH burst

DL burst #1

Format of other burst

The DL subframe consists of only one PHY PDU which starts with a long preamble
for physical synchronization, followed by the frame control header (FCH) burst, then
a number of DL bursts. Physical parameters of the DL bursts are specified in the
DIUC in the DL-MAP.
FCH burst is one OFDM symbol long and is transmitted using QPSK rate . The UL
subframe consists of contention Initial Ranging interval, contention Bandwidth
Request interval, and one or more PHY PDUs each is transmitted from a different SS.
Each UL PHY PDU consists of only one burst and starts with a short preamble
followed by an integer number of OFDM symbols. Physical parameters of UL burst
are specified in the UIUC in the UL-MAP.

Figure 3.1: TDD frame structure in 802.16 [4]

In PMP mode, in the DL subframe, the BS transmits a burst of MAC PDUs in a
broadcast manner. All SSs listen to the broadcast but an SS only processes those
PDUs that are addressed to it. In the UL subframe, any SS transmits a burst of MAC
PDUs to the BS in a TDMA manner. Based on measurements and learning at the
physical layer, any SS adapts over time the interval user code (IUC), i.e. modulation,
data rate and FEC scheme in use for both DL and UL. At the start of each frame, the
BS schedules the UL and DL bandwidth grants in order to meet the negotiated QoS
requirements. The DL grants directed to SSs having the same DIUC are advertised by
the DL-MAP as a single burst. Note that a MAP contains information of all CIDs and
their associated grants, i.e. IUC (QoS schedule) and time schedule.
There are three periods in the UL subframe: (i) Contention initial maintenance
opportunities for SSs ranging to determine network delay, to request power and any
profile changes, (ii) Contention bandwidth request opportunities for SSs to request
bandwidth in response to polling from the BS, and (iii) Data transmission
opportunities for SSs to transmit data bursts in the intervals granted by the BS
(specified in UL-MAP).
Transition gaps between these intervals are for
synchronization purpose. To resolve contention, truncated binary exponential backoff algorithm (similar to that in 802.3) is used.
WiMAX relies on a process of session setup and authentication through a series of
exchanges (downlinks DLs and uplinks ULs) between BS and SS. WiMAX supports
both time division duplex (TDD) and frequency division duplex (FDD) mode for DLs
and ULs exchange. The process starts with channel acquisition by a new SS.
Before actual data transfer can take place, a number of MAC management messages
which have to be communicated between BS and SS. The SS first has to synchronize
itself with DL channel to get the DL-MAP and UL-MAP from the BS. To set up a
connection, each SS has to perform initial ranging, capability negotiation,

authentication, registration process, in that order. Ranging process starts by sending

Ranging Request (RANG-REQ) packet to the BS in the ranging contention slots. The
SS sends RANG-REQ in each frame until it gets Ranging Response (RANG-RSP), it
then carries out capability negotiation and authentication. Next, Registration is done
by the SS in a similar request-response manner by sending a REG-REQ packet to the
BS until it receives a REG-RSP back from the latter. Now the SS is ready to set up a
connection with the BS, also in a request-response manner.

Acquisition, ranging and

Capability negotiation

Authentication and
registration

Optional

Figure 3.2: Flow chart of the SS entry and initialization

4. QoS Support in 802.16 - MAC Service Classes and Scheduling

To accommodate various QoS requirements from heterogeneous traffic, the 802.16

MAC protocol is connection-oriented and uses strict admission control. At the start of
each frame, the BS schedules the DL and UL bandwidth grants and time schedule in
order to meet the negotiated QoS requirements. All information regarding the UL
subframe (ranging period, bandwidth contention period and UL data slots) are
communicated to the SSs by the BS in the UL-MAP at the start of the DL subframe of
each frame. SSs are allowed to transmit data only in their own predetermined
transmission opportunity (i.e. time slots in the UL subframe) in a TDMA-style MAC
protocol.
A typical network topology of WiMAX in PMP mode is shown below in which SSs
communicate with external sinks through the WiMAX and the Internet.

Sink 1
SS1

802.16

BS

SS2

Internet
TCP

SSN
N

SS3

Sink 2

WiMAX network
Figure 4.1: A typical broadband wireless access (BWA) scenario using WiMAX
4.1 Bandwidth request-grant mechanisms
When an SS wishes to transmit, it sends a request message to the BS informing the
latter of its class and traffic specifications (see Table 4.1 below). The BS collects
requests from all SSs then performs bandwidth allocation to the SSs using appropriate
scheduling (granting) schemes in order to satisfy the QoS requirements of the SSs.
Since the BS controls the access to the network in the UL, upon requests from the SSs
it grants bandwidth to the latter on demand. There are four request-granting
mechanisms used for bandwidth allocation for UL:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
(iv)

unsolicited granting of a fixed bandwidth requested by the SS only during

the set-up phase of an UL connection;
unicast polling allocating just enough bandwidth for the polled UL
connection to transmit a bandwidth request, if the connection has no data
to transmit it will ignore and waste the poll;
broadcast polling by the BS to all UL connections for sending requests.
Collision occurs whenever two or more UL connections respond to the
same poll; and
piggy-backed request onto a PDU when there is backlog in the UL.

Figure 4.2: Bandwidth request and grant in BE service class [3]

The request-grant mechanisms, as described above, are used by the BS to allocate
bandwidth to an SS. The grant can be per connection (GPC) or per SS (GPSS). In the
latter mode, the SS is granted an aggregate bandwidth that it can distribute it among
many flows that take place concurrently in the SS.
4.2 QoS Architecture for 802.16
Figure 4.3a explains the QoS architecture of WiMAX defined by 802.16. Undefined
details such as UL and DL bandwidth scheduling and admission control and traffic
policing, are subjects of research and propriety implementation. Various detailed QoS
architectures have been proposed by researchers, e.g. in Figure 4.3b [12].
Down Link Scheduler in the BS
Each DL connection (with a CID) has a packet queue at the BS. For each frame,
following the set of QoS parameters and the status of the queues, the BS DL
scheduler selects from the DL queues the next SDUs to be transmitted to SSs.
Up Link Scheduler in the BS
Bandwidth requests are used by the BS to estimate the residual backlog (waiting in
the UL queues) of UL connections. Based on the difference between the amount of
bandwidth requested and bandwidth granted, the UL scheduler in the BS estimates the
backlog in each UL connection, and allocates future UL grants according to the QoS
parameters of the service class of that connection (see Table 4.1 below).
Up Link Scheduler in an SS
In the GPSS mode, although bandwidth requests are still made on per connection
basis, the BS grants an aggregate UL capacity to each SS as a whole. The SS will not
know how much bandwidth is intended by the BS for each of its connections.
Consequently, an SS scheduler is also required in each SS in order to redistribute the
granted capacity according to the set of QoS parameters of the service class in each
connection.

Figure 4.3a: 802.16 QoS Architecture

Figure 4.3b: 802.16 QoS Detailed Architecture [12]

To date, there are only a few ns-2 simulator modules for WiMAX MAC layer
simulation, e.g. [4], [7], and [8].
4.3 Service Classes and QoS Parameters
Since the BS has the knowledge of all requests and available resources, DL
scheduling is much simpler than the UL scheduling. Neither DL nor UL Scheduling
nor Admission Control and Traffic Policing schemes are specified in the 802.16

standard but are left to network operators to use their innovation.

Standard specifies the following four different service or flow classes:

However, the

Unsolicited Grant Service (UGS) has the highest priority and is used to support CBR
traffic with strict delay requirements such as PCM voice and VoIP (without silence).
Since these packet services are synchronous (i.e. fixed length, fixed data rate), they
are not required to request bandwidth for each packet, but instead the BS periodically
assigns slots according to traffic specifications once the connection is established.
The grant size is calculated by the BS based on the minimum reserved traffic rate
averaged over time, and the grant interval follows closely the packet arrival pattern
plus an offset upper bounded by the tolerated jitter. Therefore scheduling for DL
UGS traffic is not required nor is necessary.
QoS specification parameters for the traffic are therefore: minimum reserved traffic
rate, maximum delay/latency, and tolerated jitter.
Real-time Polling Service (rtPS) has the next highest priority and is used to support
VBR traffic (variable-size data packets but generated periodically) with less stringent
delay requirements such as MPEG multimedia streams and VoIP with silence. Since
the size of arriving packets is not fixed in rtPS, BS has to poll the connection of this
class periodically (unicast polling) to ask how much bandwidth is needed.
Traffic QoS specification parameters are: minimum reserved traffic rate, maximum
sustained traffic rate, and maximum delay/latency.
Non real-time Polling Service (nrtPS) , for traffic without any specific delay
requirement, e.g. FTP traffic, has higher priority than the lowest priority BE class. It
is the same as BE class except it may have additional bandwidth allocated through
non periodic polling. nrtPS therefore, is not likely to be starved.
Traffic specification parameters are: minimum reserved traffic rate, maximum
sustained traffic rate, and traffic priority.
Best Effort (BE) class is used to support traffic with no QoS such as HTTP and
TELNET traffic. This class is allowed to use only contention-based bandwidth
request. There is a fixed number of mini slots in the UL subframe that all SSs have to
share to place their requests (Figure 4.2). An increase in the number of slots can only
be made at a decrease in the bandwidth available for the transmission of the actual
data. There is possibility that BE traffic is starved by the lack of bandwidth.
Collisions of requests can corrupt some slots and contention back-off can cause
serious delay to some SSs.
Traffic specification parameters are: maximum sustained traffic rate, and traffic
priority.

Table 4.1: Characteristics of Service Flow of Classes of UL service and

corresponding QoS provided by Mobile WiMAX
QoS Category
UGS
Unsolicited Grant Service
(no explicit BW request,
contention
requests
prohibited from SS)
rtPS
Real-time Polling Service
(contention
requests
prohibited,
polled
frequently to avoid delay)
ErtPS
Extended real-time Polling
Service

Applications
VoIP
For CBR or CBR-like
service flows (SFs), e.g.
T1/E1

QoS Specifications
Max sustained rate
Max latency tolerant
Jitter tolerance

For real-time VBR-like

SFs,
e.g.
MPEG,
Streaming audio and video

Max reserved rate

Max sustained rate
Max latency tolerance
Traffic priority

activity

nrtPS
For nrtSFs with better than
Non-real-time
Polling best-effort service, e.g.
Service
bandwidth-intensive file
(contention
requests transfer
allowed,
polled
less
frequently)
BE
For BE traffic, e.g. generic
Best-Effort Service
traffic, data transfer, web
(contention
requests browsing, etc.
allowed,
QoS
not
guaranteed)

Min reserved rate

Max sustained rate
Max latency tolerance
Jitter tolerance
Traffic priority
Min reserved rate
Max sustained rate
Traffic priority

Voice
with
detection (VoIP)

Max sustained rate

Traffic priority

4.4 Popular Algorithms for 802.16 MAC Layer Schedulers

Round Robin (RR) [2]
As the name describes, the RR algorithm allocates the resource to the SSs in a cyclic
order in a fair and deterministic time manner. Therefore it ignores the current channel
conditions. The absence of the scheduling adaptation to the short-term channel
variations goes against the adaptive modulation and coding nature of WiMAX
resulting in low network throughput. Its advantage is its simplicity.
Fair Queuing (FQ) [1]
Bandwidth and buffer space are the two obvious sharing resources. Fair allocation of
buffer space is simple by dropping packets in the long queue if necessary. Fair
allocation of bandwidth is not simple. FIFO or FCFS queuing discipline is not fair
because it delegates all congestion control to the traffic sources and therefore favours
aggressive sources having long packets and continuous such as FTP. Pure RR
scheme also favours long packets and continuous traffic such as FTP which is always

present at the queue and never misses the opportunity. Packets from intermittent
traffic such as email is quite often absent at the queue, thus missing the RR polling.
Suppose the BS allocates a total amount of resource total to N SSs each requesting a
amount i. Under a certain allocation scheme each SS is allocated an amount i, so
N

that total i . Suppose there is a fair share amount fair that all SSs should
i 1

receive. The max-min fairness criterion states that an allocation is fair if:
(i) no user receives more than its request, i.e. i min( fair , i ) ,
(ii) no other allocation scheme satisfying condition (i) has a higher minimum
allocation, and
(iii)
Condition (2) remains recursively true as we remove the minimal user
and reduce the total resource accordingly total ( total min )
In [1] a FQ algorithm is proposed.
Since UGS and rtPS classes have strict delay and bandwidth constraints, scheduling
for them is usually fairly deterministic and performance relies more on admission
control rather than on scheduling. Existing real-time (deterministic) scheduling
schemes such as Weighted Fair Queuing (WFQ) [1] and Weighted Round-Robin
(WRR) [2] have proved to be very suitable for these two classes. Priority is used by
some authors for the scheduling weight of the flow class, e.g. UGS (1), rtPS (2) ,
nrtPS (3), BE (4), in Multi-class Priority Fair Queue (MPFQ) scheduling. Others use
the percentage connection bandwidth of a connection to express its weight in a WFQ
scheduling. Higher bandwidth is given higher priority or weight. Two-tier, e.g.
MPFQ followed by WFQ, scheduling has been proposed by some authors.

5. TCP Over WiMAX

Internet and wide area network traffic is predominantly TCP with well known end-toend network congestion control mechanisms relying on ACKs in the reverse direction.
While the access network, e.g. WiMAX, has its own lower layer (i.e. MAC) protocols
and associated scheduling for granting bandwidth to SSs. When the two networks
work together during an SSs access to the Internet through a WiMAX, the TCP
congestion control mechanism and the WiMAX MAC layer scheduling scheme affect
each other.
Effect of narrow bandwidth and long delay
The TCP control mechanisms originally designed for high bandwidth, short delays,
and congestion-limited wired networks are not suitable for wireless systems which are
characterized by very scarce and highly variable bandwidth, long and highly variable
delays, and error/loss-limited radio propagation. TCP end-to-end control mechanism
misinterprets errors over a wireless link as congestion in the link and reacts by
reducing its congestion window, hence decreasing the throughput. When TCP
segments/packets arrive at the last-hop router (e.g. the BS in WiMAX) to be routed
into the narrow-bandwidth wireless network, they suffer from long delays in the
queue at the router. This inflates the RTT figure, hence limiting the growth of the
TCP congestion window size, again reducing the throughput. The segment/packet
queuing can cause the buffer to overflow resulting in packet loss, again limiting the
growth of the congestion window.

Effect of Bandwidth Asymmetry

The WiMAX MAC layer scheduler affects the reverse bandwidth, hence the ACKs,
and the round-trip time (RTT) used by the TCP congestion control mechanisms.
Since TCP is a self-clocking protocol which relies on the incoming ACKs to estimate
the RTT for the control of data flow in the opposite direction. Therefore, for TCP to
behave normally, the ACK packets in the reverse direction must maintain the same
time spacing as the data packets in the forward direction. In wireless networks, the
DL and UL usually do not have the same bandwidth.
Traditionally, a network is said to be asymmetrical if the bandwidth (i.e. speed) of the
DL channel and that of the UL channel are not the same, e.g. ADSL. However, recent
works on TCP performance, the relevant asymmetry is defined as the ratio of the
transmission time of ACKs on the reverse channel to that of packets on the forward
channel, i.e. in networks that use one ACK packet to acknowledge the receipt of d
data packets, then
ACKpacketLength ForwardCha nnelSpeed
Re verseChannelSpeed d ( DataPacketLength)
ForwardCha nnelBandwidth ACKpacketLength 1
(
)(
)( )
Re verseChannelBandwidth DataPacketLength d
k

This is called normalised bandwidth asymmetry [5] [6]. Thus the bandwidth
asymmetry is less serious because of the TCP ACKs (typically 40 bytes) is much
shorter than data packets. TCP behaves normally when k=<1.
Since reliable transport protocols such as TCP uses the arrival rate of ACKs in the
reverse channel to control packet flow in the forward direction, congestion in the
reverse channel may lead to poor performance of the TCP traffic. Their performance
is affected by the asymmetry of the network. Furthermore, TCP is ack-clocked, i.e.
relying on the arrival of ACKs to make the next progress and fully utilize the
available bandwidth of the path. There are many versions of TCP congestion control
and error control but they are all based on the sliding window mechanism, slow start,
congestion avoidance and fast retransmit or fast recovery. Since TCP increases the
window size by counting the rate of ACKs received, a small bandwidth ACK path (i.e.
slow rate of ACKs arrival) can significantly slow down the growth of the TCP sender
window during a slow start, independent of the link bandwidth in the direction of data
transfer. Also in this situation, the reverse channel becomes congested and its buffer
can overflow, loosing ACK packets, hence seriously affecting the performance of
TCP. This is the situation in most wireless networks including WiMAX. Note that in
WiMAX, the ratio of DL:UL bandwidth can be adjusted by the network operator, in a
10ms TDD frame, DL:UL = 2ms:8ms for example. Frame size affects the TCP roundtrip time (RTT). The one-way end-to-end delay is roughly equal to the frame size
plus a fixed delay representing delays in other parts of the network from the SS to the
BS, and is determined during initial ranging. The maximum tolerable delay in an
802.16 network is specified as 40ms.
In wireless networks variable delay paths can make the senders estimate of the
round- trip time (RTT) inaccurate and therefore increases the TCPs retransmission

timeout value. In WiMAX, it is difficult for the SSs to estimate the bandwidth
required for TCP flow to make request to the BS, due to the dynamic changes of the
TCP sending rate under congestion control. Bandwidth request can be omitted and is
replaced by some simple parameter (e.g. recent sending rate of packet connection [3]).
TCP performance over DOCSIS (Data-over-Cable Service Interface Specification)
has been studied recently for CATV in [6]. Since 802.16 MAC layer protocol is
almost identical to DOCSIS MAC layer protocol, we expect similar effect of WiMAX
MAC layer scheduling on the performance of TCP traffic as is in DOCSIS. The BS
and SSs in WiMAX correspond to the CMTS (Cable Modem Termination System)
and CMs (Cable Modems) respectively, in CATV. The TCP-over-DOCSIS analysis in
[6] is carried out for TCP Reno using delayed ACK mechanism for congestion
control.

References
[1] A. Demers et al., Analysis and Simulation of a Fair Queuing Algorithm, ACM
SIGCOMM Computer Communications Review, vol. 19, 1989.
[2] M. Katevenis et al., Weighted Round Robin Cell multiplexing in a GeneralPurpose ATM Switch Chip, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications,
vol. 9, no. 8, pp.1265-1279, Oct. 1991.
[3] Seungwoon Kim and Ikjun Yeom, Performance Analysis of Best Effort Traffic
in IEEE 802.16 Networks, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing, 2007.
[4] An ns-2 module for simulating WiBro based on IEEE 802.16, August 2006,
available at
http://cnlab.kaist.ac.kr
[5] H. Balakrishnan et al., The effects of asymmetry on TCP performance, Mobile
Networks and Applications, vol. 4, pp.219-241, 1999.
[6] Wanjiun Liao, The Behavior of TCP Over DOCSIS-Based CATV Networks,
IEEE Transactions on Communications, vol.54, no. 9, pp.1633-1642, Sept. 2006.
[7] Jenhui Chen et al., The Design and Implementation of WiMAX Module for ns-2
Simulator, Taiwan 2006
[8] Richard Rouil, The Network Simulator NS-2 NIST add-on IEEE 802.16
model (MAC+PHY), National Institute of Standards and Technology, September
2006

[9] G.S. Chu, D. Wang, and S. Mei, A QoS Architecture for the MAC Protocol of
IEEE 802.16 BWA System, IEEE Conference on Communications, Circuits, and
Systems and West Sino Expositions, pp. 435-439, July 2002
[10] G.S. Paschos et al, A heuristic Strategy for IEEE 802.16 WiMAX scheduler
for Quality of Service,
[11] Alexander Sayenko et al., Ensuring the QoS Requirements in 802.16
Scheduling, Proceedings International Workshop on Modeling Analysis and
Simulation of Wireless and Mobile Systems MSWiM06, pp.108-117, October 2006
Malaga, Spain
[12] C. Cicconetti et al., Quality of Service Support in IEEE 802.16 Networks,
IEEE Network, pp. 50-55, Mar/Apr 2006
Professor Thong Nguyen
Sydney 16 February 2007