Wireless communication method, wireless communication device and computer program product

Abstract

The invention provides a wireless communication method for a multi-link device, a wireless communication device and a computer program product. The wireless communication method comprises the following steps: determining whether window restriction events occur for a predetermined number of times for a block acknowledgement (BA) window shared by a plurality of links during the period of sending a data packet to an opposite-end multi-link device by using the plurality of links; determining a target link causing the window limiting event in the plurality of links in response to the window limiting event occurring for a predetermined number of times; and adjusting a data packet sending strategy of the target link to reduce the packet loss number of the target link.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This disclosure relates to the field of communications, specifically to a wireless communication method, a wireless communication device, and a computer program product. Background Technology

[0002] With the development of wireless communication technology, Wi-Fi technology has continued to evolve to meet the demands for higher throughput, lower latency, and more stable connections. The Multi-Link Operation (MLO) introduced in Wi-Fi 7 enables devices that support Multi-Link Multi-Radio (MLMR) to transmit data simultaneously on multiple links.

[0003] However, in practical deployments, the channel contention intensity and interference levels of each link in a multi-link scenario often differ. Without coordinated control of multi-link resources, the advantages of concurrent multi-link transmission may not be fully realized. Therefore, how to effectively coordinate data transmission between multiple links in complex wireless environments and fully unleash the potential of MLO remains a pressing technical problem to be solved. Summary of the Invention

[0004] According to one aspect of this disclosure, a wireless communication method is provided, comprising: during the transmission of data packets to a peer multi-link device using multiple links, determining whether a predetermined number of window limiting events have occurred for a block acknowledgment (BA) window shared by the multiple links; in response to the occurrence of the predetermined number of window limiting events, identifying a target link among the multiple links that caused the window limiting event; and adjusting a data packet transmission strategy of the target link to reduce the number of packet losses on the target link.

[0005] In one or more embodiments of the foregoing aspects of this disclosure, determining whether a predetermined number of window limiting events has occurred includes: determining whether the predetermined number of window limiting events has occurred based on event reports from the underlying Wi-Fi chip of the multi-link device.

[0006] In one or more embodiments of the foregoing aspects of this disclosure, determining whether a predetermined number of window-limiting events has occurred includes: obtaining link state information for each of the plurality of links; and predicting whether a predetermined number of window-limiting events has occurred based on the link state information for each link.

[0007] In one or more embodiments of the foregoing aspects of this disclosure, the link state information includes one or more of the following parameters for each link: channel utilization parameter; link quality metric; and number of channel contention failures.

[0008] In one or more embodiments of the foregoing aspects of this disclosure, determining the target link causing the window limiting event among the plurality of links includes: determining the target link among the plurality of links based on the link state information of each of the plurality of links, wherein the link state information includes one or more of the following parameters: channel utilization parameter; link quality metric; and number of channel contention failures.

[0009] In one or more embodiments of the foregoing aspects of this disclosure, adjusting the packet transmission strategy of the target link to reduce the number of packet losses on the target link includes: selecting a target transmission rate with a packet loss rate below a threshold from a plurality of candidate transmission rates; and applying the target transmission rate to the target link to reduce the number of packet losses.

[0010] In one or more embodiments of the above aspects of this disclosure, selecting a target transmission rate with a packet loss rate lower than a threshold from a plurality of candidate transmission rates includes: obtaining the throughput corresponding to each of the plurality of candidate transmission rates; and selecting a candidate transmission rate with a packet loss rate lower than the threshold and the largest throughput from the plurality of candidate transmission rates as the target transmission rate.

[0011] In one or more embodiments of the foregoing aspects of this disclosure, adjusting the data packet transmission strategy of the target link to reduce the number of packet losses on the target link includes: reducing the total number of data packets transmitted through the target link to reduce the number of packet losses.

[0012] In one or more embodiments of the foregoing aspects of this disclosure, reducing the total number of data packets sent through the target link includes: assigning data packets of the same access class to be sent to the peer multi-link device to a first service identifier (TID) and a second TID, wherein one of the first TID and the second TID is mapped to the multiple links and the other is mapped to a link other than the target link; and using the first TID and the second TID to send data packets of the same access class.

[0013] In one or more embodiments of the above aspects of this disclosure, allocating data packets of the same access class to be sent to the peer multi-link device to the first TID and the second TID includes: allocating data packets of the same access class to the first TID and the second TID proportionally, wherein the proportion is a preset proportion.

[0014] In one or more embodiments of the above aspects of this disclosure, allocating data packets of the same access class to be sent to the peer multi-link device to the first TID and the second TID includes: allocating data packets of the same access class to the first TID and the second TID proportionally, wherein the proportion is adjusted in real time based on the congestion level of each of the multiple links.

[0015] In one or more embodiments of the foregoing aspects of this disclosure, adjusting the data packet transmission strategy of the target link to reduce the number of packet losses on the target link includes: reducing the aggregation degree of data packets transmitted through the target link to reduce the number of packet losses.

[0016] In one or more embodiments of the foregoing aspects of this disclosure, the wireless communication method further includes: in response to the number of occurrences of the window limiting event decreasing to below the predetermined number within a specified time, restoring the data packet transmission strategy of the target link prior to the adjustment.

[0017] In one or more embodiments of the foregoing aspects of this disclosure, the BA window is a sliding BA window, and wherein the window limiting event is predicted to occur when the distance between the first data packet in the sliding BA window that is not successfully acknowledged by the peer multilink device and the window start position of the sliding BA window is less than a threshold distance.

[0018] In one or more embodiments of the above aspects of this disclosure, the BA window is a sliding BA window, and wherein, if the number of pending data packets in the transmission queue of the multi-link device is greater than the sum of the number of each target data packet of the multiple links, and the portion of the pending data packets within the sliding BA window is less than the sum of the number of each target data packet of the multiple links, then the window limiting event is detected.

[0019] According to another aspect of this disclosure, a wireless communication device is provided, comprising: a transceiver; a memory storing computer-readable instructions thereon; and a processor coupled to the transceiver and the memory, wherein when the computer-readable instructions are executed by the processor, the wireless communication device causes the wireless communication device to perform the wireless communication method as described above.

[0020] According to another aspect of this disclosure, a computer program product is provided, which includes computer-readable instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform the wireless communication method as described above.

[0021] According to various aspects of this disclosure, by identifying or predicting window limitation events and adjusting the packet transmission strategy of the target link that causes them, it is possible to solve or alleviate the problem in MLMR devices where, when data is transmitted via multiple links sharing the same BA window, a link experiences significant packet loss, leading to limited BA window sliding and consequently affecting data transmission on other links. This helps to improve the overall data transmission efficiency in MLO scenarios. Attached Figure Description

[0022] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions of the embodiments of this disclosure, the accompanying drawings used in the description of the embodiments will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are merely some exemplary embodiments of this disclosure. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without any creative effort.

[0023] Figure 1 This is an exemplary schematic diagram illustrating the communication architecture between multiple link devices in an MLO scenario.

[0024] Figure 2 This is an exemplary diagram illustrating how multiple links share the same BA window to perform data transmission in an MLO scenario, and how a single link performs data transmission in an SLO scenario.

[0025] Figure 3 This is a flowchart of a wireless communication method according to an embodiment of the present disclosure.

[0026] Figure 4 This is an exemplary schematic diagram illustrating a communication architecture in an MLO scenario where multi-link devices allocate data packets of the same access class to different TIDs for data transmission.

[0027] Figure 5 A hardware block diagram of a communication device according to an embodiment of the present disclosure is shown. Detailed Implementation

[0028] To make the objectives, technical solutions, and advantages of the embodiments of this disclosure clearer, the technical solutions of the embodiments of this disclosure will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings. Obviously, the described embodiments are only some, not all, of the embodiments of this disclosure. All other embodiments obtained by those skilled in the art based on the described embodiments of this disclosure without creative effort are within the scope of protection of this disclosure. Features of the various described embodiments can be combined or substituted with each other, unless explicitly excluded or should be excluded based on the context.

[0029] In this disclosure, the term "access point" or "AP" is used to refer to a network infrastructure component that provides wireless access to remote terminals. The term "site" or "STA" is used to refer to a communication device that wirelessly accesses an access point to obtain various communication services (such as voice, video, packet data, messaging, broadcasting, etc.), whether the site is a mobile device (e.g., a mobile phone or smartphone) or a fixed device (e.g., a desktop computer, media player, fixed sensor, television, etc.). Depending on the network type, other well-known terms such as "router" or "gateway" may be used instead of "access point" or "AP," and other well-known terms such as "mobile station," "user station," "remote terminal," "user equipment," "wireless terminal," or "user equipment" may be used instead of "site" or "STA." Generally, a site can communicate with the network via an access point. For example, a site can communicate with the Internet via an access point according to the IEEE 802.11 standard set. In this disclosure, a site in a WLAN can function as an access point in different contexts, and vice versa. This is because communication devices in the context of IEEE 802.11 (Wi-Fi) technology can include site hardware components and access point hardware components. In this way, the communication device can switch between site mode and access point mode based on the actual WLAN conditions and / or requirements.

[0030] It should be understood that the term "comprising" and its variations as used in this disclosure are open-ended, meaning "including but not limited to". The term "based on" means "at least partially based on". The term "one embodiment" means "at least one embodiment"; the term "another embodiment" means "at least one additional embodiment"; the term "some embodiments" means "at least some embodiments". Relevant definitions for other terms will be given in the description below.

[0031] It should be understood that the concepts of "first" and "second" mentioned in this disclosure are used only to distinguish different devices, modules, units, models, data, etc., and are not used to limit the order of the functions performed by these devices, modules, units, models, data, or their interdependencies.

[0032] Figure 1 This is an exemplary schematic diagram illustrating the communication architecture between multi-link devices (MLDs) in an MLO scenario. For example, Figure 1 The communication architecture shown illustrates a scenario where communication between an access point (AP) and a station (STA) utilizes MLO (Multi-Link Optimization). During the standardization of WLANs, the MLD (Multi-Link Optimization) architecture was introduced, which allows multiple links to be established between the access point and the station to enable simultaneous data transmission or reception. By adopting the MLD architecture, it is possible to establish multiple links in different frequency bands between the access point and the station. For example, Figure 1 The diagram shows the connection established between AP 101 and STA 102. AP 101 can be, for example, a wireless router or a public hotspot device, and STA 102 can be, for example, a smartphone, tablet, computer, or other device with internet access. Figure 1 As shown, three links 103-1, 103-2, and 103-3 can be established between AP 101 and STA 102. These three links can operate, for example, in the 2.4 GHz, 5 GHz, and 6 GHz frequency bands, respectively. These links can be established using different chips on different frequency bands, or they can be established using the same chip on the same frequency band. The specific frequency band selection can be determined according to actual needs and is not limited to the frequency bands mentioned above.

[0033] like Figure 1 As shown, to support the three corresponding links, AP 101 includes three access point entities: access point entity 101-1, entity 101-2, and entity 101-3, each corresponding to a different frequency band. Similarly, STA 102 also includes three site entities: site entity 102-1, entity 102-2, and entity 102-3, also corresponding to different frequency bands. As an illustrative example, link 103-1 is established between access point entity 101-1 and site entity 102-1, which can operate in the 2.4 GHz frequency band; link 103-2 is established between access point entity 101-2 and site entity 102-2, which can operate in the 5 GHz frequency band; and link 103-3 is established between access point entity 101-3 and site entity 102-3, which can operate in the 6 GHz frequency band. It is understood that the above three links are merely illustrative examples, and there may be more or fewer links; this disclosure is not limited thereto. According to embodiments of this disclosure, data can be transmitted or received simultaneously on these links, thereby achieving efficient data communication. It is understood that although the above description uses data transmission between AP and STA as an example, the data transmission involved in this disclosure is not limited to this and can also be data transmission between APs.

[0034] As mentioned above, in actual deployments, the channel contention intensity, interference level, and other characteristics of each link in a multi-link scenario often differ, necessitating intelligent control among multiple links. For example, data transmissions on links related to the same Block ACK (BA) window may interfere with each other, potentially resulting in no gain in the overall transmission efficiency of MLO compared to Single-Link Operation (SLO), or even lower than the transmission efficiency of SLO, as described in detail below.

[0035] Specifically, the IEEE 802.11 standard introduces the Base Buffer (BA) mechanism. The BA window defines the index range of data packets that can be managed by the BA mechanism between the sender and receiver. The sender transmits multiple data packets within the index range covered by the BA window. The receiver receives, buffers, and rearranges these data packets, generating BA feedback to indicate the reception status of the data packets within that index range. Based on this BA feedback, the sender identifies unacknowledged data packets and performs retransmission control. If data packets at the index corresponding to the start of the BA window and all subsequent consecutive indices are acknowledged, the sender advances the BA window to allow data packets at subsequent indices to enter the BA window and continue transmitting data packets.

[0036] As mentioned above, when MLMR devices transmit data via MLO, all links can share the same BA window, and the number of data packets currently allowed to be sent is determined jointly by the negotiated BA window size d_window and the earliest index idx_noack that has not received an ACK feedback. The index idx_allow of the allowed data packets cannot exceed idx_noack + d_window - 1. The following will further combine... Figure 2 Describe the potential performance impact between links under this MLO mechanism.

[0037] Figure 2 Examples are shown where multiple links share the same BA window to perform data transmission in an MLO scenario, and where data transmission is performed through a single link in an SLO scenario. Figure 2 The diagram on the left illustrates an example of data transmission via 2G and 6G links in an MLO scenario, where the horizontal axis represents the index of the data packet and the vertical axis represents time. Figure 2As shown in the diagram on the left, the sending end can, for example, establish a shared BA window between a 2G link and a 6G link for the same TID. Each data packet can be transmitted via either the 2G link or the 6G link. The receiving end can uniformly receive, buffer, and rearrange data packets from both links, and use BA feedback to indicate the reception status of each data packet within a specified index range. The sending end advances the BA window based on this BA feedback. If the data packets at the index corresponding to the starting point of the BA window and subsequent consecutive indices are all acknowledged, the BA window slides forward; if there are unacknowledged data packets within the specified index range, the advancement of the BA window is blocked, and the starting point of the window remains at the index corresponding to the first unacknowledged data packet until the unacknowledged data packet is retransmitted and acknowledged, after which the BA window can continue to advance. In this disclosure, the event in which the BA window is blocked and the starting point of the window remains at the index corresponding to the first unacknowledged data packet, resulting in the inability to send more new data packets, is called a window limiting event. It can be understood that the window limiting event is usually determined by factors such as the position of the first unacknowledged data packet and the length of the BA window.

[0038] In this scenario, for example, assuming the 2G link is congested while the 6G link is relatively idle, data packets sent via the 2G link may experience longer reception times for BA (Balanced Receiver) feedback or significant packet loss within the BA due to channel contention failures or poor channel quality, affecting the confirmation of reception of data packets sent via the 2G link. Figure 2 As shown in the black area of ​​the left-hand diagram, a data packet sent by the transmitter on the 2G link fails to receive an acknowledgment for an extended period due to channel contention, thus blocking the sliding of the BA window. This increases the update interval of the BA window and shortens the sliding distance of each update. In this situation, even if other data frames are successfully transmitted via the 6G link, the starting point of the BA window can only slide to the location of that data packet in the next update. Since the BA window length is fixed, the maximum index of the data packets that can be sent becomes smaller, resulting in a decrease in the overall transmission efficiency of MLO. In contrast, Figure 2 The diagram on the right illustrates an example of data transmission via a 6G link only in an SLO scenario. In this case, since data is transmitted only through the 6G link, congestion on other links does not affect the sliding of the BA window. The sender can continuously slide the BA window based on the acknowledgment results from the 6G link and maintain high transmission efficiency. As can be seen from the above comparison, in this case, MLO does not bring any gain to data packet transmission; instead, it reduces overall transmission efficiency. In this disclosure, the situation where the transmission efficiency of the MLMR device in the MLO scenario is lower than that in the SLO scenario can be referred to as a negative gain scenario.

[0039] As mentioned above, under the same service load and wireless environment conditions, MLO does not necessarily lead to an improvement in transmission efficiency. When multiple links share a BA window, if one link experiences packet loss, it may affect the advancement of the BA window and consequently affect the data transmission of other links. As a result, the overall throughput and latency performance of MLO may have no gain compared to SLO, or even have a negative gain.

[0040] In view of this, this disclosure addresses the issue of overall performance degradation caused by excessive packet loss in a specific frequency band among multiple frequency bands sharing a BA window in MLO scenarios. To improve this problem, the wireless communication method disclosed in this disclosure mainly involves the following aspects:

[0041] (1) Confirm the occurrence of window limit events (i.e., identify potential negative gain scenarios).

[0042] (2) Identify the link that caused the window restriction event; and

[0043] (3) Control the link that caused the window restriction event.

[0044] The wireless communication method according to embodiments of the present disclosure will now be described in detail. Figure 3 This is a flowchart of a wireless communication method 300 according to an embodiment of the present disclosure. Figure 3 As shown, the wireless communication method 300 may include steps S310 to S330. It can be understood that... Figure 3 The execution entity involved in the wireless communication method 300 can be either an AP or a STA. The execution entity can communicate with the peer device as a data sender and retransmit data and / or send new data based on feedback information from the peer device.

[0045] In step S310, during the transmission of data packets to the peer multi-link device using multiple links, it is determined whether a predetermined number of window limitation events have occurred for the block acknowledgment (BA) window shared by the multiple links. Here, as mentioned above, in conjunction with... Figure 2The event described, for example, can be termed a window limitation event: The existence of unacknowledged data packets within a shared BA window prevents the sender from advancing the BA window's starting point to the index corresponding to the first unacknowledged data packet during the next window update. This prevents the transmission of more data packets that could otherwise be sent (e.g., the next data packet after the updated BA window's end). In other words, the BA window, which should advance based on consecutive indices of acknowledged data packets, is hindered by the presence of unacknowledged data packets, and its starting point remains at the index corresponding to the unacknowledged data packet, preventing the transmission of new data packets. For example, a BA window of length 64 sends 64 data packets with indices 11-74 in a transmission and waits for ACK feedback for each packet. If ACK feedback for each data packet with indices 11-74 is successfully received, it is determined that the 64 data packets have been successfully received, and the BA window advances unimpeded during the next window update. However, if the data packet with index 13 is not received within a certain time, it is determined that the data packet with index 13 was not successfully received. In this case, compared with the case where all 64 data packets were successfully received, the distance that the BA window can advance is shorter during the next window update, and data packets that should have been able to continue sending without window limitations become impossible to send.

[0046] Based on the above description, the window limiting event of this disclosure can be predicted based on the relative position of the first unacknowledged data packet within the BA window. In some embodiments, if the distance between the first unacknowledged data packet within the BA window and the starting position of the BA window is less than a threshold distance, there is a certain probability that a window limiting event will occur, thus the occurrence of a window limiting event can be predicted. Here, the relative position can be defined as the distance between the first unacknowledged data packet and the starting point of the BA window. d. In some embodiments, to exclude occasional cases such as the loss of a single BA due to transient interference, a threshold α can be set instead of the window length d_window as the evaluation criterion. The standard for d. If If d is less than the specified threshold α, it is considered that a window limiting event has occurred or may occur. For example, in Figure 2 In the MLO scenario illustrated on the left, assuming the length of the shared BA window, d_window, is 64, and during the transmission of data packets indexed 11-74, the first data packet that is not successfully acknowledged (refer to...) Figure 2 The index idx_noack corresponding to the black part in the diagram on the left is 13. Therefore, the distance between this data packet and the starting point of this BA window is... d is 13-11=2, meaning it's close to the starting point of the window. During the next update of the BA window, the starting point can only slide to index 13. Therefore, this situation can be called a window limitation event. The value of the threshold α can depend on the length of the shared BA window; in the above embodiment, it can be, for example, 5, but it is not limited to this. This effectively filters window blocking caused by single acknowledgment loss or short-term jitter, avoiding unnecessary subsequent link scheduling or retransmission strategy adjustments.

[0047] The above text describes how to predict window limiting events based on the relative distance between the first unacknowledged data packet within the BA window and the starting position of the BA window. In some embodiments, if the number of pending data packets in the transmission queue of a multi-link device is greater than the sum of the number of target data packets for each of the multiple links, and the portion of the pending data packet within the sliding BA window is less than the sum of the number of target data packets for each of the multiple links, then a window limiting event is detected. Here, the number of target data packets may refer to the target transmission volume of data packets allocated by the transmitting device to each link in an MLO scenario. In this case, if there were no window limiting, the sum of the number of target data packets for each of the multiple links should be successfully transmitted; however, because of the window limiting, the sum of the number of target data packets for each of the multiple links cannot be transmitted in its entirety. Therefore, this disclosure can determine whether a window limiting event has actually occurred based on the relationship between the portion of the pending data packet within the sliding BA window (i.e., the number of data packets allowed to be transmitted by the current BA window) and the sum of the number of target data packets for each of the multiple links.

[0048] As shown above, window limit events can be predicted either by the relative distance between the first unacknowledged data packet within the BA window and the starting position of the BA window, or by the relationship between the number of data packets to be sent in the sending queue, the portion of the data packets to be sent within the sliding BA window, and the sum of the number of target data packets across multiple links. It should be understood that when counting the occurrences of window limit events, these two methods can be used individually or in combination. In other words, regarding the following two conditions related to window limit events:

[0049] Condition (1): The distance between the first data packet in the BA window that is not successfully acknowledged by the peer multi-link device and the window start position of the BA window is less than a threshold distance;

[0050] Condition (2): The number of data packets to be sent in the sending queue of the multi-link device is greater than the sum of the number of target data packets of the multiple links, while the portion of the data packet to be sent within the sliding BA window is less than the sum of the number of target data packets of the multiple links.

[0051] A window limiting event can be determined to have occurred if conditions (1) and / or (2) are met. It is understood that, in addition to the above conditions, the window limiting event involved in this disclosure can be characterized from other dimensions, and this disclosure does not limit it in this way.

[0052] In practical deployments, window limiting events may sometimes be caused by incidental factors (e.g., short-term interference on a link, increased instantaneous channel contention, etc.), resulting in individual data packets not being successfully acknowledged within a feedback cycle. If a window limiting event is caused by incidental interference on a link, it can generally be eliminated naturally through the retransmission and acknowledgment process of data packets, and the BA window can then resume normal progress. Executing additional control measures may actually lead to a waste of computing resources or a decrease in overall transmission efficiency. Therefore, it is possible to determine whether a predetermined number of window limiting events have occurred to prevent resource waste or unnecessary reduction in transmission efficiency caused by incidental interference. For example, if the statistical value of window limiting events for a certain BA window reaches a predetermined number, it is determined that one or more of the multiple links related to that BA window have encountered problems (e.g., significant packet loss) that affect the progress of the BA window, and subsequent control processing is required. In some embodiments, a threshold β can be set as the predetermined number, and the threshold β can be, for example, 3, but is not limited to this. Window limit events can be determined by the Wi-Fi chip or its internal firmware based on the BA session status, ACK feedback, and window progress. Alternatively, they can be calculated and identified by the upper-layer scheduling module based on the confirmation information obtained from the Wi-Fi chip. They can also be predicted based on the status of each link related to the BA window. Specific details will be provided below.

[0053] The above provides a detailed description of the characterization of window-limiting events. The following section details how to determine whether a predetermined number of window-limiting events (i.e., whether a negative gain scenario exists) has occurred. Generally, in this disclosure, whether a predetermined number of window-limiting events has occurred can be determined directly based on reports from the Wi-Fi chip, or predicted based on link state information of each link, or obtained through other methods, but is not limited to these.

[0054] In some embodiments, determining whether a predetermined number of window limiting events have occurred may include: determining whether a predetermined number of window limiting events have occurred based on event reports from the underlying Wi-Fi chip of the multi-link device. For example, the Wi-Fi chip can obtain the statistical number of events where each link cannot send more data packets due to BA window limitation. In this case, the Wi-Fi chip can monitor the data packet transmission status on each link during data transmission. If it detects that a link cannot continue to send data packets at a certain moment, the internal processor determines whether the reason for the inability to continue sending data packets is that there are no more data packets to be sent, the window length has reached its limit, or the window sliding is obstructed due to the shared BA window being in a restricted state. If it is determined that a window limiting event has occurred, causing the window sliding to be obstructed and preventing the link from continuing to send data packets, the window limiting event counter increments the record of the BA window limiting event that occurred on that link. The statistical results of the BA window limiting events that occurred on each link can be read by the upper-layer software or main processor in the AP for subsequent analysis and link control. For example, if the number of window restriction events counted on a certain link reaches a predetermined number (e.g., 10 window restriction events are counted on a 6G link by the Wi-Fi chip), it can be determined that the BA window shared by that link and other links is in a restricted state, causing sliding to be hindered. Therefore, further subsequent control processing is needed (e.g., determining which links are mainly causing the BA window restriction and what kind of processing is required) to remove the restricted state of the BA window. Details of the above control processing will be described later.

[0055] In other embodiments, determining whether a predetermined number of window-limiting events has occurred may include: obtaining link state information for each of the multiple links; and predicting whether a predetermined number of window-limiting events has occurred based on the link state information for each link. In some embodiments, the link state information may include one or more of the following parameters for each link: channel utilization parameter, link quality metric, and number of channel contention failures, etc. Accordingly, the state of each link (e.g., whether it is in a congested state, etc.) can be analyzed based on these parameters to predict whether a predetermined number of window-limiting events has occurred. Specific examples of the above parameters will be further described below.

[0056] In some embodiments, the channel utilization parameter may include, for example:

[0057] (1) Self-channel utilization, which represents the degree of channel occupancy caused by the transmission activities of this device (i.e., the MLMR device involved in the wireless communication method of this disclosure). The lower the self-channel utilization, the fewer stable transmission opportunities are available to this device, the greater the possibility of BA window sliding being blocked, that is, the greater the possibility of window limiting events occurring.

[0058] (2) Overlap Basic Service Set Channel Utilization (OBSS Channel Utilization) indicates the degree of channel occupancy caused by the transmission activities of other devices overlapping with this device. The higher the OBSS channel utilization, the stronger the competition for the same frequency and the greater the possibility of window-limiting events.

[0059] (3) Noise Channel Utilization, which represents the degree of channel occupancy caused by noise, external interference, etc. The higher the noise channel utilization, the stronger the noise interference, the more likely it is to cause reception errors or acknowledgment failures, and the greater the possibility of window limiting events.

[0060] (4) Total Channel Utilization (TCU) indicates the overall occupancy of the channel. A higher TCU indicates that the channel is generally busier, packet reception acknowledgments are more likely to be delayed, and window limiting events are more likely to occur.

[0061] In some embodiments, link quality metrics may include the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR), real-time rate, and packet loss statistics for each link. For example, a lower SNR or SINR for a link indicates greater interference, making it more likely to experience reception errors, increased retransmissions, or delayed acknowledgments, thus hindering the sliding of the BA window corresponding to that link, i.e., increasing the likelihood of a window-limiting event. A lower real-time rate for a link indicates lower effective transmission capacity, requiring longer transmission and acknowledgment times for the same number of data packets, further increasing the likelihood of a window-limiting event. A higher packet loss statistics for a link indicates that unacknowledged data packets are more likely to remain on that link, increasing the likelihood of a window-limiting event. In other words, a lower SNR or SINR, lower real-time rate, and higher packet loss statistics for a link increase the likelihood of a window-limiting event; conversely, a higher SNR or SINR, higher real-time rate, and lower packet loss statistics for a link decrease the likelihood of a window-limiting event.

[0062] In some embodiments, the number of channel contention failures can refer to the statistical count of events where each link fails to acquire a channel. For example, a higher number of such events indicates that the link has a greater difficulty in obtaining a data transmission opportunity, and the corresponding round-trip delay of the BA feedback may be higher, thus hindering the BA window sliding, i.e., increasing the likelihood of a window-limiting event. Conversely, a lower number of channel contention failures indicates that the link is more likely to obtain a transmission opportunity, and the BA feedback can be returned more promptly, reducing the likelihood of a window-limiting event.

[0063] It should be understood that the parameters referenced in predicting whether a predetermined number of window limit events will occur can be any one or more of the above, but are not limited thereto. Any parameter that helps in analyzing whether a predetermined number of window limit events will occur falls within the protection scope of this disclosure.

[0064] Based on the above description, step S301 can determine whether a predetermined number of window limit events have occurred, thereby determining whether the sliding of the entire BA window (i.e., the MLMR device is in a negative gain state) is affected by problems such as excessive packet loss in one or more of the multiple links during data transmission of the MLMR device. This determines whether the processing described later is needed to reduce the number of packet losses in the problematic links and prevent the excessive packet loss in the problematic links from greatly reducing the data transmission efficiency in the MLO scenario.

[0065] The above provides a detailed explanation of step S301. The following section will further describe how to determine the specific link that led to the window restriction event.

[0066] In step S302, in response to a predetermined number of window limiting events, the target link causing the window limiting event is determined among multiple links. Here, the target link refers to the link that caused the window limiting event and requires subsequent control processing based on the determination of the target link to eliminate the window limiting event; hence, it is called the target link. By identifying the specific link that causes the BA window sliding to be blocked, it is helpful to adjust the data packet sending strategy of each link in subsequent steps, thereby reducing the number of packet losses and mitigating the reduction in transmission efficiency caused by the window limiting event. Generally, the link causing the window limiting event can be determined by parameters representing the state of each link, but it is not limited to this.

[0067] In some embodiments, determining the target link causing the window limiting event among multiple links includes: determining the target link among the multiple links based on the link state information of each of the multiple links, wherein the link state information may include one or more of the following parameters: channel utilization parameter; link quality metric; and number of channel contention failures. The link state information, as well as the channel utilization parameter, link quality metric, and number of channel contention failures, have been described in detail above and will not be repeated here. In this embodiment, for example, one or more of the parameters such as the channel utilization parameter, link quality metric, and number of channel contention failures may be considered comprehensively to determine the target link causing the BA window limiting event. For example, in an MLO scenario where data is transmitted via 2G and 6G, if a large number of BA window limiting events are detected on the 6G link, and one or more of the following events are detected for the 2G link: low channel utilization, high OBSS channel utilization, high noise channel utilization, high total channel utilization, low SNR or SINR, low real-time rate, high number of packet loss statistics, and high number of channel contention failures, it can be determined that the 2G link is causing a window limiting event in the BA window shared by the 2G and 6G links, affecting data transmission on the 6G link and reducing the overall data transmission efficiency in this MLO scenario. Therefore, subsequent control processing can be performed based on the judgment of the target link. It is understood that although the above embodiment uses the scenario of two links sharing a single BA window, where congestion on the 2G link adversely affects data transmission on the 6G link, the link that triggers the window limiting event is not limited to this. For example, a problem on the 6G link could also adversely affect data transmission on the 2G link. Furthermore, the number of links that trigger window limiting events is not limited to one. For example, in a scenario where 2G, 5G, and 6G links share the same BA window, congestion on the 2G and 5G links could affect data transmission on the 6G link.

[0068] Furthermore, it is understood that although steps S301 (i.e., confirming the window limitation event) and S302 (i.e., confirming the specific link causing the window limitation event) have been described as two separate steps above, this is not the limitation. In some embodiments, these two steps can be combined or separated. For example, when predicting window limitation events based on the link status information of each link, it is not necessary to divide them into separate steps S301 and S302. Instead, based on the status information of each link, the problematic link causing the window limitation event can be directly located while predicting potential window limitation events.

[0069] The above describes the identification of window restriction events and the location of the target link that causes them. The following section will specifically describe the adjustments made to the packet transmission strategy of the target link to mitigate or eliminate window restriction events.

[0070] In step S303, the data packet sending strategy of the target link is adjusted to reduce the number of packet losses on the target link. This can alleviate or even eliminate window limitation events caused by excessive packet loss on the target link, thereby improving the overall data transmission efficiency of each link.

[0071] As mentioned above, in an MLO scenario where multiple links share the same BA window, the occurrence of a BA window limitation event can be attributed to at least one of the links experiencing significant packet loss, affecting window updates and thus reducing the performance of the remaining links. The number of packet losses can be approximated by multiplying the total number of packets by the packet error rate (PER). Therefore, this disclosure considers reducing the total number of packet losses by decreasing the packet error rate and reducing the total number of packets. Generally, this can be achieved through various means such as limiting the transmission rate of the target link to reduce its PER, allocating fewer packets to the target link, and lowering the maximum allowed aggregation degree of the target link.

[0072] Below, a specific example is provided for step S303.

[0073] When selecting a data transmission rate for each link, the goal is usually to maximize the link's estimated throughput. Estimated throughput refers to the estimated amount of effective data that can be successfully transmitted per unit time based on the current link conditions and historical transmission feedback (e.g., ACK results, retransmission counts). Generally, the system prioritizes configurations with high estimated throughput to improve the data transmission rate on that link. However, higher transmission rates usually place high demands on channel quality, which may lead to a higher packet loss rate. For example, in a 2G link, a certain rate R_1 corresponds to an estimated throughput of 100M and a PER of 5%, while a rate R_2, which is one level lower than R_1, corresponds to an estimated throughput of 90M and a PER of 2%. If the higher rate R_1 is selected as the transmission rate, although it can bring a 10M throughput gain to the 2G link compared to rate R_2, its corresponding PER is 3% higher than R_2, resulting in more packet loss. These packet losses will affect the updating of the BA window, thus affecting data transmission on the 6G link. In conclusion, while the 2G link selected the highest throughput rate for itself, it did not select the rate most beneficial to MLO (Mean Loss Optimization). That is, using the maximization of estimated throughput for a single link as the transmission rate selection strategy may not necessarily yield the transmission rate most beneficial to overall MLO performance. Therefore, the PER (Performance Ratio) on the link can be reduced by limiting the data transmission speed of the link. This will be discussed in more detail below.

[0074] In some embodiments, adjusting the packet transmission strategy of a target link to reduce the number of packet losses on that target link includes: selecting a target transmission rate with a packet loss rate below a threshold from multiple candidate transmission rates; and applying the target transmission rate to the target link to reduce the number of packet losses. The candidate transmission rates are rates selected by the rate selection module in the MLMR device, and the target transmission rate is the rate selected by the rate selection module for data transmission applied to that link. As explained above, when selecting a data transmission rate for each link, the goal is usually to maximize the estimated throughput of that link. However, this may lead to higher PER (Performance Ratio), which, in an MLO (Multi-Link Optimization) scenario, may affect the updating of the shared BA (Balanced Default) window, thereby affecting data transmission on other links. In other words, using only maximizing the estimated throughput of a single link as the transmission rate selection strategy may not select the transmission rate most beneficial to the overall performance of MLO. Therefore, selecting a target transmission rate with a packet loss rate below a threshold and applying it to the target link can, to some extent, avoid the aforementioned window limitation event. This threshold can be, for example, 2%, but is not limited to this.

[0075] In some embodiments, selecting a target transmission rate with a packet loss rate below a threshold from multiple candidate transmission rates includes: obtaining the throughput corresponding to each of the multiple candidate transmission rates; and selecting the candidate transmission rate with a packet loss rate below the threshold and the highest throughput from the multiple candidate transmission rates as the target transmission rate. Here, the concepts of estimated throughput and theoretical throughput can be introduced. Theoretical throughput represents the maximum data transmission capacity that the link can carry per unit time under a given configuration, without considering factors such as packet loss, retransmission, and backoff. Estimated throughput represents the effective throughput that the link can expect to achieve per unit time under actual channel conditions, taking into account the successful delivery ratio caused by factors such as packet loss rate. The estimated throughput corresponding to a rate on a certain link can be approximated, for example, by the following formula:

[0076] T i est = T i the ×( 1 – PER_v i ) ……(1)

[0077] Among them, T i est Indicates the candidate transmission rate v on this link i The corresponding estimated throughput, T i the Indicates the candidate transmission rate v on this link i The corresponding theoretical throughput, PER_v i Indicates the candidate transmission rate v on this link i The corresponding packet loss rate, where i is an integer greater than 0. Through equation (1), the packet loss rate of a certain link and the corresponding candidate transmission rates v can be obtained. i The corresponding estimated throughput T i est .

[0078] Before each data transmission, the MLMR device can iterate through its internally preset rate ranges and mark rates with packet loss rates exceeding a preset threshold as unselectable rates. Then, rates other than the unselectable rates can be used as candidate transmission rates, and the estimated throughput corresponding to each candidate rate can be calculated. Finally, the estimated throughput of each candidate rate can be compared, and the rate with the highest estimated throughput can be selected as the target transmission rate for data transmission. As mentioned above, eliminating transmission rates with high packet loss rates to determine candidate transmission rates reduces the number of packet losses on the target link, preventing excessive packet loss on the target link from affecting the BA window sliding and consequently impacting data transmission on other links. Selecting the rate with the highest estimated throughput among the candidate transmission rates as the target rate ensures data transmission performance is as high as possible while maintaining a reasonable number of packet losses.

[0079] In some embodiments, the rate selection module can obtain the estimated PER corresponding to each rate as PER_v in the above equation (1) based on the actual packet loss situation over a certain period of time and the results of link rate detection. i The estimated throughput corresponding to this rate is calculated using the above equation (1). The above link rate probing can be, for example, modulation and coding scheme (MCS) probing, but is not limited to this.

[0080] The above provides a detailed explanation of limiting the transmission rate of the target link to reduce its PER. Below, we will explain in detail how to allocate fewer data packets to the target link.

[0081] In some embodiments, adjusting the packet transmission strategy of the target link to reduce the number of packet losses on the target link includes reducing the total number of packets transmitted through the target link to reduce the number of packet losses. Reducing the total number of packets transmitted through the target link can reduce the number of packet losses on the target link, thereby mitigating or even eliminating the shared BA window limitation event caused by the target link and avoiding adverse effects on data transmission on other links. As an exemplary way to reduce the total number of packets transmitted through the target link, it is possible to assign packets of the same Access Category (AC) to two Traffic Identifiers (TIDs), and map these two TIDs to all links and other links except the target link, respectively. An exemplary way to reduce the total number of packets transmitted through the target link will be described below.

[0082] In some embodiments, reducing the total number of data packets sent through the target link includes: allocating data packets to be sent to the same AC of the peer multi-link device to a first TID and a second TID, wherein one of the first TID and the second TID is mapped to multiple links and the other is mapped to a link other than the target link; and using the first TID and the second TID to send data packets of the same access class. The following is in conjunction with... Figure 4 The following is a detailed description of this embodiment. Figure 4 This is an exemplary schematic diagram illustrating a communication architecture in an MLO scenario where multi-link devices allocate data packets from the same AC to different TIDs for data transmission. Figure 4 In the diagram, what are the meanings of AP 401, STA 402, entities 401-1~401-3, entities 402-1~402-3, and links 403-1~403-3? Figure 1 AP 101, STA 102, entities 101-1~101-3, and entities 102-1~102-3 are basically the same, so explanations are omitted here. Figure 4 As shown, for example, link 403-1 can be a 2G link, link 403-2 can be a 5G link, and link 403-3 can be a 6G link. They share the same BA window, and it is assumed that a shared BA window limitation event has been triggered due to the high number of packet loss on the 2G link, which has affected data transmission on the 5G and 6G links. Figure 4 Label 405 indicates a specific AC queue. In this case, packets in that AC queue of the MLMR device can be allocated to... Figure 4 The first TID and the second TID shown are used to map the first TID to all links, namely the 2G link, the 5G link, and the 6G channel, while the second TID is mapped only to the 6G link. It should be understood that although the above example uses mapping the second TID only to the 6G link, the other links mentioned are not specifically limited; for example, they can be 5G links, 6G links, or even both 5G and 6G links simultaneously. In short, as long as the second TID is mapped to a link other than the target link, it is acceptable. In this way, based on the confirmed target link causing the window limiting event, other links that are relatively unobstructed compared to the target link can handle more data transmission tasks, indirectly reducing the total number of packets allocated to the target link, thereby reducing the number of packet losses on the target link, and thus mitigating or even eliminating the shared BA window limiting event caused by the target link, avoiding adverse effects on data transmission on other links.

[0083] In some embodiments, allocating data packets of the same access class to be sent to the peer multi-link device to a first TID and a second TID includes: proportionally allocating data packets of the same access class to the first TID and the second TID, wherein the proportion is a preset proportion. For example, it can be preset that 50% of the data packets are allocated to the first TID and the remaining 50% of the data packets are allocated to the second TID, but the preset proportion is not limited to this. In some embodiments, the preset proportion can be obtained based on the throughput of each link. For example, in Figure 4 In the example, assuming a window limiting event has been confirmed due to high packet loss on the 2G link, and the first TID is mapped to all links, and the second TID is mapped to the 6G link, then if the overall throughput of all links is 900Mbps and the throughput of the 6G link is 600Mbps, the number of packets allocated to the first and second TIDs can be determined based on the overall throughput of all links and the throughput of the 6G link. Since the ratio of the overall throughput of all links to the throughput of the 6G link is 3:2, 60% of the packets can be allocated to the first TID, and the remaining 40% can be allocated to the second TID. Of course, the method for obtaining this preset ratio is not limited to this; more factors besides throughput can be considered, and more complex calculation methods can be used. Using the ratio calculated based on the throughput of each link as the preset ratio to allocate data in the same AC to different TIDs can better utilize the load capacity of each link and improve the overall data transmission efficiency.

[0084] In other embodiments, allocating data packets of the same access class to be sent to the peer multi-link device to the first TID and the second TID includes: proportionally allocating data packets of the same access class to the first TID and the second TID, wherein the proportion is adjusted in real time based on the congestion level of each link among the multiple links. This is because the channel states of different links are not static. Even if it is currently determined that the 2G link is congested and the 6G link is unobstructed, and some data is mapped to all links and the remaining data packets are mapped to the 6G link for transmission, it cannot be guaranteed that the 6G link will remain unobstructed in the future. If the 6G link becomes congested from a certain moment and the number of packet losses increases, continuing to use the previous data allocation proportion in this case may lead to new window limiting events due to the 6G link congestion. Therefore, dynamically adjusting the proportion in real time according to the congestion level of each link among the multiple links helps to better adapt to changes in the link environment and improve the overall data transmission efficiency.

[0085] The above provides a detailed explanation of allocating fewer packets to the target link. Below, we will explain in detail how to lower the maximum allowed aggregation level for the target link.

[0086] In some embodiments, adjusting the packet transmission strategy of the target link to reduce the number of packet losses on the target link includes reducing the aggregation degree of packets transmitted through the target link to reduce the number of packet losses. Here, the aggregation degree can refer to the degree to which the sender aggregates packets in a single data transmission, specifically, the number of packets aggregated in a single data transmission. A higher aggregation degree indicates more packets aggregated in a single data transmission, while a lower aggregation degree indicates fewer packets aggregated in a single data transmission. In some embodiments, the aggregation degree can be the number of MPDUs contained in a single A-MPDU. A lower aggregation degree results in fewer packets in a single data transmission, shorter channel occupancy time, and a lower probability of interference due to channel congestion. Furthermore, even if there are packets that cannot be successfully received, fewer other packets are affected, the burden of retransmitting data is lower, and it is easier to return ACK feedback in a timely manner. Therefore, reducing the aggregation degree of packets transmitted on the target link can help reduce the number of packet losses on the target link and avoid window blocking affecting data transmission on other links sharing the same window.

[0087] The above provides a detailed explanation of step S303.

[0088] In some embodiments, the wireless communication method disclosed herein may further include step S340, such as... Figure 3The dashed box in the figure shows the process. In step S340, in response to the number of times the window limit event occurs within a specified time being reduced to below a predetermined number, the packet transmission strategy of the target link before adjustment is restored. This is because, as mentioned above, the method of adjusting the packet transmission strategy of the target link in step S303 to reduce the number of packet losses on the target link can mainly involve the following methods: (1) limiting the transmission rate of the target link to reduce the PER of the link; (2) allocating fewer packets to the target link; and (3) reducing the upper limit of the aggregation degree allowed by the target link, etc. Method (1) sacrifices the transmission rate of the target link in order to reduce the PER of the target link. The main idea of ​​methods (2) and (3) is to reduce the total load and the load of a single data transmission allocated to the target link. In other words, it can be understood as reducing the utilization rate of the resources of the target link. Therefore, if the number of times the window limit event occurs is detected to be reduced to below a predetermined number, it can be determined that the problem of the BA window sliding being restricted due to the high number of packet losses of one or more of the multiple links, which in turn affects the data transmission of other links, no longer exists. In this situation, continuing to use the strategy adjusted in step S303 might result in a lower target link rate (in other words, the target link rate could have been higher since PER limitation is no longer required) and insufficient utilization of target link resources. This would reduce the overall data transmission efficiency of the MLMR device. Therefore, restoring the target link's packet transmission strategy before the adjustment when the number of window limit events decreases below a predetermined number within a specified time helps to continue subsequent data transmission with higher efficiency.

[0089] Furthermore, in some embodiments, the link state information of each link can be further combined to comprehensively determine whether it is necessary to restore the data packet transmission strategy of the target link before the aforementioned adjustment. This helps to improve the accuracy of the judgment. The link state information of each link may include one or more of the following parameters for each link: channel utilization parameters, link quality metrics, and the number of channel contention failures, etc. These parameters have been described in detail above and will not be repeated here. For example, in an MLO scenario where 2G and 6G share the same BA window and it has been determined that the BA window is limited due to 2G link congestion, if the number of BA window limitation events is detected to be reduced to below a predetermined number, and at the same time, the 2G link's own channel utilization is high, the OBSS channel utilization is low, and the SNR is high, it can be determined that the problem of BA window sliding limitation caused by the high number of packet losses on the 2G link, which in turn affects the data transmission of the 6G link, no longer exists. Therefore, the data packet transmission strategy before the adjustment can be restored.

[0090] Figure 5 A hardware block diagram of a communication device according to an embodiment of this disclosure is shown. Figure 5As shown, the communication device 500 includes a processor 510, a memory 520, and a bus 530. For example, the communication device 500 may be an access point (AP) or a station (STA) as described above.

[0091] The processor 510 may be any processing-capable device capable of implementing the functions of the various embodiments of this disclosure, such as a general-purpose processor, digital signal processor (DSP), ASIC, field programmable gate array (FPGA) or other programmable logic device (PLD), discrete gate or transistor logic, discrete hardware components, or any combination thereof designed to perform the functions described herein.

[0092] The memory 520 may include computer system readable media in the form of volatile memory, such as random access memory (RAM) and / or cache memory, or other removable / non-removable, volatile / non-volatile computer system memory, such as hard disk drives, floppy disks, CD-ROMs, DVD-ROMs, or other optical storage media.

[0093] Bus 530 is used to connect the processor 510 and memory 520, and its main function is to serve as a data transmission channel, ensuring efficient exchange of data and instructions between the processor 510 and memory 520. It is understood that, although not shown in the figures, device 500 may also include additional components, such as transceivers, antennas, and input / output devices like displays, keyboards, and mice, for communication. These additional components can be configured according to specific application scenarios and requirements to expand the functionality of device 500. This disclosure does not limit the specific components included in the communication device, as long as these components can support device 500 in implementing the functions of the embodiments of this disclosure.

[0094] In this embodiment, the memory 520 stores computer program instructions, and the processor 510 can execute the instructions stored in the memory 520. When the computer program instructions are executed by the processor, the processor performs the wireless communication method of this embodiment. The wireless communication method is similar to that described above for... Figures 3-4 The descriptions are basically the same, so I will not repeat them here to avoid repetition.

[0095] The communication technology according to this disclosure can also be implemented by providing a computer program product containing program code for implementing the method or device, or by any storage medium storing such a computer program product.

[0096] The basic principles of this disclosure have been described above with reference to specific embodiments. However, it should be noted that the advantages, benefits, and effects mentioned in this disclosure are merely examples and not limitations, and should not be considered as essential features of each embodiment of this disclosure. Furthermore, the specific details disclosed above are for illustrative and facilitative purposes only, and are not limitations. These details do not limit the scope of this disclosure to the necessity of employing the specific details described above. Additionally, features from one embodiment can be combined with features from one or more other embodiments to obtain more embodiments.

[0097] The block diagrams of devices, apparatuses, devices, and systems disclosed herein are merely illustrative examples and are not intended to require or imply that they must be connected, arranged, or configured in the manner shown in the block diagrams. As those skilled in the art will recognize, these devices, apparatuses, devices, and systems can be connected, arranged, and configured in any manner. Words such as “comprising,” “including,” “having,” etc., are open-ended terms meaning “including but not limited to,” and are used interchangeably with them. The terms “or” and “and” as used herein refer to the terms “and / or,” and are used interchangeably with them unless the context clearly indicates otherwise. The term “such as” as used herein refers to the phrase “such as but not limited to,” and is used interchangeably with it.

[0098] Additionally, as used herein, the "or" used in a list of items beginning with "at least one" indicates a separate list, such that a list of, for example, "at least one of A, B, or C" means A or B or C, or AB or AC or BC, or ABC (i.e., A and B and C). Furthermore, the word "exemplary" does not imply that the described example is preferred or better than other examples.

[0099] It should also be noted that in the apparatus and method of this disclosure, the components or steps can be disassembled and / or recombined. These disassemblies and / or recombinations should be considered as equivalent solutions to this disclosure.

[0100] It will be understood by those skilled in the art that all or any part of the methods and apparatus of this disclosure can be implemented in hardware, firmware, software, or a combination thereof in any computing device (including processors, storage media, etc.) or network of computing devices. The hardware may be a general-purpose processor, digital signal processor (DSP), ASIC, field-programmable gate array (FPGA) or other programmable logic device (PLD), discrete gate or transistor logic, discrete hardware components, or any combination thereof designed to perform the functions described herein. The general-purpose processor may be a microprocessor, but alternatively, it may be any commercially available processor, controller, microcontroller, or state machine. The processor may also be implemented as a combination of computing devices, such as a combination of a DSP and a microprocessor, multiple microprocessors, one or more microprocessors cooperating with a DSP core, or any other such configuration. The software may reside in any form of computer-readable tangible storage medium. By way of example and not limitation, such computer-readable tangible storage media may include RAM, ROM, EEPROM, CD-ROM or other optical disc storage, disk storage or other magnetic storage devices, or any other tangible medium that can be used to carry or store desired program code in the form of instructions or data structures and is accessible by a computer. If used herein, the discs include compact discs (CDs), laser discs, optical discs, digital universal discs (DVDs), floppy discs, and Blu-ray discs.

[0101] Various changes, substitutions, and modifications can be made to the technology described herein without departing from the teachings defined by the appended claims. Furthermore, the scope of the claims of this disclosure is not limited to the specific aspects of the processes, machines, manufactures, events, means, methods, and actions described above. Currently existing or later-developed processes, machines, manufactures, events, means, methods, or actions that perform substantially the same function or achieve substantially the same result as the corresponding aspects described herein can be utilized. Therefore, the appended claims include such processes, machines, manufactures, events, means, methods, or actions within their scope.

[0102] The above description of the disclosed aspects is provided to enable any person skilled in the art to make or use this disclosure. Various modifications to these aspects will be readily apparent to those skilled in the art, and the general principles defined herein may be applied to other aspects without departing from the scope of this disclosure. Therefore, this disclosure is not intended to be limited to the aspects shown herein, but rather to be carried out within the widest scope consistent with the principles and novel features disclosed herein.

[0103] The above description has been given for purposes of illustration and description. Furthermore, this description is not intended to limit the embodiments of this disclosure to the forms disclosed herein. Although numerous exemplary aspects and embodiments have been discussed above, those skilled in the art will recognize variations, modifications, alterations, additions, and sub-combinations thereof.

Claims

1. A wireless communication method for multi-link devices, comprising: During the transmission of data packets to peer multi-link devices using multiple links, a predetermined number of window limit events are determined for the block acknowledgment (BA) window shared by the multiple links. In response to the occurrence of the window limiting event a predetermined number of times, the target link causing the window limiting event is determined among the plurality of links; as well as Adjust the data packet sending strategy of the target link to reduce the number of packet losses on the target link.

2. The wireless communication method as described in claim 1, wherein, The window limit event that determines whether a predetermined number of occurrences has occurred includes: Based on event reports from the underlying Wi-Fi chip of the multi-link device, it is determined whether the window limit event has occurred a predetermined number of times.

3. The wireless communication method as described in claim 1, wherein, The window limit event that determines whether a predetermined number of occurrences has occurred includes: Obtain the link status information of each of the multiple links; and Based on the link status information of each link, predict whether a predetermined number of window-limited events will occur.

4. The wireless communication method as described in claim 3, wherein, The link status information includes one or more of the following parameters for each link: Channel utilization parameters; Link quality metrics; and Number of channel contention failures.

5. The wireless communication method as described in claim 1, wherein, The target link that caused the window restriction event among the multiple links includes: Based on the link status information of each of the multiple links, the target link is determined among the multiple links, wherein the link status information includes one or more of the following parameters: Channel utilization parameters; Link quality metrics; and Number of channel contention failures.

6. The wireless communication method as described in claim 1, wherein, Adjusting the packet sending strategy of the target link to reduce the number of packet losses on the target link includes: Select the target transmission rate with a packet loss rate below a threshold from among multiple candidate transmission rates; and The target transmission rate is applied to the target link to reduce the number of packet losses.

7. The wireless communication method as described in claim 6, wherein, Selecting a target transmission rate with a packet loss rate below a threshold from among multiple candidate transmission rates includes: Obtain the throughput corresponding to each of the multiple candidate transmission rates; and The candidate transmission rate with the highest packet loss rate and the lowest packet loss rate among the multiple candidate transmission rates is selected as the target transmission rate.

8. The wireless communication method as described in claim 1, wherein, Adjusting the packet sending strategy of the target link to reduce the number of packet losses on the target link includes: Reduce the total number of data packets sent through the target link to reduce the number of packet losses.

9. The wireless communication method as described in claim 8, wherein, Reducing the total number of data packets sent through the target link includes: Data packets of the same access class to be sent to the peer multi-link device are assigned to a first service identifier (TID) and a second TID, wherein one of the first TID and the second TID is mapped to the multiple links and the other is mapped to a link other than the target link; and Data packets within the same access category are sent using the first TID and the second TID.

10. The wireless communication method as described in claim 9, wherein, Assigning data packets of the same access class to be sent to the peer multilink device to the first TID and the second TID includes: Data packets within the same access category are proportionally allocated to the first TID and the second TID, wherein the proportion is a preset proportion.

11. The wireless communication method as described in claim 9, wherein, Assigning data packets of the same access class to be sent to the peer multilink device to the first TID and the second TID includes: Data packets within the same access category are proportionally allocated to the first TID and the second TID, wherein the proportion is adjusted in real time based on the congestion level of each of the multiple links.

12. The wireless communication method as described in claim 1, wherein, Adjusting the packet sending strategy of the target link to reduce the number of packet losses on the target link includes: Reduce the aggregation degree of data packets sent through the target link to reduce the number of packet losses.

13. The wireless communication method as described in claim 1, further comprising: In response to the occurrence of the window limit event decreasing to below the predetermined number within a specified time, the packet transmission strategy of the target link before the adjustment is restored.

14. The wireless communication method as described in claim 1, wherein, The BA window is a sliding BA window, and the window limiting event is predicted to occur when the distance between the first data packet in the sliding BA window that is not successfully acknowledged by the peer multi-link device and the starting position of the sliding BA window is less than a threshold distance.

15. The wireless communication method as described in claim 1, wherein, The BA window is a sliding BA window, and if the number of pending data packets in the transmission queue of the multi-link device is greater than the sum of the number of target data packets of the multiple links, and the portion of the pending data packets within the sliding BA window is less than the sum of the number of target data packets of the multiple links, then the window restriction event is detected.

16. A wireless communication device, comprising: transceiver; Memory on which computer-readable instructions are stored; as well as A processor, coupled to the transceiver and the memory, causes the wireless communication device to perform the wireless communication method according to any one of claims 1-15 when the computer-readable instructions are executed by the processor.

17. A computer program product comprising computer-readable instructions that, when executed by a processor, cause the processor to perform the wireless communication method according to any one of claims 1-15.

Images