M2M Traffic Management via QoS-Based Priority Queuing
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current cellular networks face congestion due to the equal treatment of all Machine-to-Machine (M2M) traffic, leading to inefficient resource allocation and high operational costs, as not all M2M communications require the same Quality of Service (QoS) and latency tolerance.
Innovation Solution
A method and system that differentiate M2M traffic based on QoS parameters by assigning messages to input queues with varying delays, allowing devices with higher latency tolerance to use fewer front-end worker resources and those requiring higher QoS to use more resources, thereby optimizing network performance.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Device complexity
If all M2M traffic is treated equally, then network simplicity is maintained, but network congestion occurs and resource allocation becomes inefficient
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments M2M traffic into different priority levels (high priority and low priority queues) based on QoS requirements. This allows the network to treat different M2M traffic types differently, resolving the contradiction by maintaining basic network simplicity while introducing targeted segmentation only where needed to prevent congestion and improve efficiency.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent applies local quality by providing differentiated service qualities to different M2M traffic flows based on their specific QoS requirements. Instead of uniform treatment, the system assigns different queue priorities and resource allocations to different traffic types, improving overall network efficiency while keeping the core network architecture relatively simple.
2Reliability
If more front end worker resources are applied to reduce latency, then QoS improves, but network operational costs increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies partial action by providing enhanced QoS resources (front end worker resources) only to M2M traffic that explicitly requires it, rather than applying full resources to all traffic uniformly. This allows the system to improve QoS for latency-sensitive applications while avoiding unnecessary operational costs for latency-tolerant applications.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent changes the resource allocation parameter dynamically based on QoS requirements. By modifying the level of front end worker resources assigned to different traffic flows according to their latency tolerance and QoS needs, the system optimizes the balance between service quality and operational cost.
3Use of energy by moving object
If M2M devices use minimal throughput, then spectrum consumption is reduced, but core network bottleneck increases operational costs
Solution Approach 1:
The patent extracts the traffic management function from the core network bottleneck by introducing priority-based queuing mechanisms at the radio access network level. This allows M2M devices to maintain minimal throughput usage while the network manages congestion through intelligent queue prioritization, separating the spectrum efficiency benefit from the core network cost problem.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent introduces an intermediary mechanism (priority queueing system) between the M2M devices and the core network. This intermediary manages the traffic flow by prioritizing messages based on QoS requirements, allowing devices to use minimal spectrum while the intermediary handles the core network resource allocation to reduce operational costs.
Data Source
AI summary
A method and system for managing M2M traffic in a network is provided. The M2M device sends a message that includes a machine identity for the M2M device. A query is submitted to a database that correlates the machine identity with a QoS parameter or a priority. The message is assigned to one of a plurality of input queues based on the assigned QoS parameter or priority. Each input queue is associated with a delay period so that the message is held in the queue for a period less than the delay period.