Performance evaluation of some hybrid ARQ schemes in IEEE 802.11a networks

Strinati, Emilio Calvanese; Simoens, S.; Boutros, Joseph J.

doi:10.1109/vetecs.2003.1208890

Cited by 12 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 9 publications

(20 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1, to reach the destination, each packet flow needs to travel through all nodes in the predetermined route, and some of these nodes are responsible for en/decoding the packets. In the ARQ and HARQ protocols [1], [5], [11], each hop drops distorted packets and requests for complete or partial retransmission of the original packets. Though these methods guarantee the reliability between any pair of nodes, they cause high delays and low throughput due to numerous retransmissions at every hop.…”

Section: Problem Statement Consider a Wireless Network Comprised Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…RELATED WORK The link-layer protocol of the current TCP/IP stack has adopted variations of error recovery mechanisms to provide reliability for point-to-point communication especially for wireless systems. Different wireless communication standards currently utilize variations of error control protocols that generally can be categorized into ARQ [12] and HARQbased [5], [11] protocols. For instance IEEE802.11 WiFi uses ARQ where a receiving node discards corrupted packets (even when there is only a single bit error) and requests for a retransmission.…”

Section: B Simulation On Matlabmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In conjunction with the current wireless link-layer standards, there is significant work and research conducted to imporve the performance of either ARQ-or HARQ-based protocols. Several kinds of HARQ protocols (see [5], [11] and the reference therein) improve the throughput of the ARQ schemes by packet combining, e.g. by keeping the erroneous received packets and utilizing them for detection and packet recovery.…”

Section: B Simulation On Matlabmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The majority of these efforts either consider variations of the ARQ, HARQ or a hybrid approach of both schemes [1], [5], [11], [12]. They largely follow the traditional "store-and-forward" link-layer design paradigm: each data packet must be fully received and corrected by every relay node before it is forwarded.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

CEDAR: An optimal and distributed strategy for packet recovery in wireless networks

Qiu

Shen

Soltani

et al. 2013

2013 Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Underlying link-layer protocols of wireless networks use the conventional "store and forward" design paradigm cannot provide highly sustainable reliability and stability in wireless communication, which introduce significant barriers and setbacks in scalability and deployments of wireless networks. In this paper, we propose a Code Embedded Distributed Adaptive and Reliable (CEDAR) link-layer framework that targets low latency and high throughput. CEDAR is the first comprehensive theoretical framework for analyzing and designing distributed and adaptive error recovery for wireless networks. It employs a theoretically-sound framework for embedding channel codes in each packet and performs the error correcting process in selected intermediate nodes in packet's route. To identify the intermediate nodes for the en/decoding for minimizing average packet latency, we mathematically analyze the average packet delay, using Finite State Markovian Channel model and priority queuing model, and then formalize the problem as a non-linear integer programming problem. Also, we propose a scalable and distributed scheme to solve this problem. The results from real-world testbed "NESTbed" and simulation with Matlab prove that CEDAR is superior to the schemes using hop-by-hop decoding and destination-decoding not only in packet delay but also in throughput. In addition, the simulation results show that CEDAR can achieve the optimal performance in most cases.

show abstract

Section: Problem Statement Consider a Wireless Network Comprised Ofmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: B Simulation On Matlabmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: B Simulation On Matlabmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

CEDAR: An optimal and distributed strategy for packet recovery in wireless networks

Qiu

Shen

Soltani

et al. 2013

2013 Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In the literature, there are four types of HARQ schemes, namely, HARQ Type-I [6], Type-II with Chase combining (CC) [7], Type-II with incremental redundancy (IR) [8], and Type-III [9]. These four types of HARQ schemes have been applied to many wireless systems, such as WCDMA [10] and IEEE 802.11a [11]. In [12], the performance of MB-OFDM UWB systems employing HARQ Type-I and Type-III schemes was studied.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hybrid ARQ with Rate Adaptation in Multiband OFDM UWB Systems

Wang

Ryu

Chen

et al. 2009

2009 IEEE International Conference on Communications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-In this paper, we propose a cross-layer design (CLD) scheme combining rate adaptation and four types of hybrid automatic repeat request (HARQ) for multiband orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (MB-OFDM) ultra wideband (UWB) systems following the ECMA-368 standard. The time varying property is incorporated into standard UWB channel models for the purpose of investigating rate adaptation. To accurately accommodate fast time-varying channel conditions, we propose to embed the selected rate information into the acknowledgement (ACK) frames. It is shown that the proposed CLD scheme combining rate adaptation and HARQ can provide higher throughput than the HARQ-only schemes. Among the four types of HARQ schemes, HARQ Type-III has the best throughput performance while Type I has the worst.

show abstract