Multi-Access Point Service Period Coordination for Co-Channel Interference
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing wireless networks face interference issues due to uncoordinated operations among co-channel Access Points (APs), leading to increased latency, packet loss, and reduced throughput, which are not adequately addressed by current interference mitigation techniques like CSMA/CA, C-TDMA, and C-RTWT, especially in applications requiring ultra-reliable and low-latency performance.
Innovation Solution
Implementing Multi-Access Point Coordination (MAPC) techniques that involve disseminating traffic flows, sequencing Service Periods (SPs) by priority, enabling queue jumping, protecting SPs via chaining, and refarming between SPs, while supporting ultra-reliable and ultra-low latency channel access for Time Sensitive Networking (TSN) and other applications.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Ease of operation
If uncoordinated operations among co-channel Access Points are used, then device complexity is reduced and ease of operation is improved, but interference increases leading to higher latency and packet loss
Solution Approach 1:
Multiple co-channel Access Points merge their service period schedules through coordination protocols, combining their channel access plans to avoid overlapping transmissions. This merging of scheduling operations reduces interference while maintaining coordinated control across the wireless network.
Solution Approach 2:
The service period scheduling system dynamically adjusts transmission timing and duration based on real-time network conditions, traffic priorities, and interference levels. This dynamic coordination allows APs to adapt their operations to minimize collisions while maintaining high network reliability for time-sensitive applications.
2Reliability
If coordinated service periods are implemented among multiple Access Points, then interference is reduced and network reliability is improved, but device complexity and system coordination requirements increase
Solution Approach 1:
The wireless medium is segmented into distinct service periods with defined start and end times, allowing multiple Access Points to operate in coordinated time slots. This segmentation of channel access into structured periods reduces the complexity of continuous coordination by creating predictable, bounded transmission windows.
Solution Approach 2:
Access Points employ periodic service period schedules with regular intervals and predictable patterns. This periodic structure simplifies coordination complexity by establishing rhythm-based transmission cycles, making it easier for APs to anticipate and prepare for coordinated channel access without requiring complex real-time negotiation.
3Productivity
If service periods are extended to accommodate more traffic, then throughput is improved, but latency increases for time-sensitive applications
Solution Approach 1:
Different service periods are allocated with different priorities and characteristics based on local traffic requirements. Time-sensitive applications receive dedicated service periods with higher priority and stricter timing constraints, while best-effort traffic receives service periods optimized for throughput. This local quality differentiation allows simultaneous optimization for both latency and throughput in different parts of the traffic flow.
Solution Approach 2:
The system allocates sufficient service period resources to handle time-sensitive traffic with guaranteed latency bounds, even if this means not fully utilizing channel capacity for all traffic types. By providing partial service period allocation for critical applications, the system ensures low latency for essential traffic while accepting reduced overall throughput efficiency.
Data Source
AI summary
Multi-Access Point (AP) coordinated Service Periods (SPs) may be provided. Flow-set data is determined comprising data for one or more Quality of Service (QoS) flows-sets of one or more clients. The flow-set data is sent to one or more neighboring co-channel APs. Neighbor flow-set data is received comprising data for one or more neighbor QoS flow-sets from at least one of the one or more neighboring co-channel APs. Service Level Agreements (SLAs) are established for the one or more QoS flow-sets and the one or more neighbor QoS flow-sets based on the flow-set data and the neighbor flow-set data. One or more SPs are scheduled for at least one of the one or more QoS flow-sets and the one or more neighbor QoS flow-sets based on the SLAs.