QoS Parameter Negotiation for 5G Multimedia Sessions
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing wireless communication systems face challenges in efficiently managing Quality of Service (QoS) parameters for multimedia sessions, particularly in ensuring optimal end-to-end packet loss and latency across 5G networks.
Innovation Solution
A method where an offeror and an answerer exchange QoS parameters for a multimedia session, with the answerer determining if the initial QoS parameters are acceptable and adjusting them if necessary to ensure the session can be established with desired QoS levels.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If the offeror sets strict QoS parameters (low packet loss, low latency) for the multimedia session, then the quality of service is improved, but the session establishment fails when the answerer cannot meet these parameters
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements dynamic QoS parameter adjustment by allowing the answerer to modify the offeror's initial QoS parameters (packet loss and latency) based on its own capabilities. The answerer compares received QoS parameters against its capabilities and negotiates adjusted parameters that both parties can satisfy, transforming static QoS requirements into dynamic, adaptable values.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent changes the QoS parameters themselves during the session establishment process. The answerer receives initial parameters, evaluates them against its capabilities, and proposes modified parameters (different packet loss and latency values) that are more realistic and achievable, thereby resolving the contradiction between strict quality requirements and actual system capabilities.
2Productivity
If the answerer adjusts QoS parameters to match its capabilities, then the session establishment success rate is improved, but the quality of service may deteriorate
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements a feedback mechanism where the answerer evaluates the offeror's QoS parameters against its own capabilities and provides feedback in the form of adjusted parameters. This feedback loop allows the system to converge on QoS values that are both achievable and maintain acceptable quality, rather than simply accepting or rejecting the original parameters.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent performs preliminary evaluation of QoS parameters before final session establishment. The answerer proactively adjusts parameters based on capability assessment before the session begins, preventing establishment failure while ensuring that the negotiated parameters still meet minimum quality thresholds.
3Adaptability or versatility
If the system negotiates QoS parameters dynamically during session establishment, then the adaptability to different network conditions is improved, but the signaling overhead and establishment time increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent implements partial adjustment of QoS parameters rather than complete renegotiation. The answerer selectively modifies only those parameters (packet loss, latency) that it cannot satisfy, leaving other parameters unchanged. This partial action approach reduces the complexity and time of the negotiation process while still achieving the necessary adaptability.
Data Source
AI summary
In an aspect, an answerer receives, from an offeror, a first plurality of quality of service (QoS) parameters for a multimedia session, the first plurality of QoS parameters including first loss and/or latency parameters indicating first desirable maximum end-to-end packet loss and/or latency for the multimedia session, determines that the first desirable maximum end-to-end packet loss is higher than a second desirable maximum end-to-end packet loss, the first desirable maximum end-to-end packet latency is higher than a second desirable maximum end-to-end packet latency, or both, and sends, to the offeror, a second plurality of QoS parameters for the multimedia session, the second plurality of QoS parameters including a second loss parameter indicating the second desirable maximum end-to-end packet loss, a second latency parameter indicating the second desirable maximum end-to-end packet latency, or both.