Wireless Scheduler Using End-to-End Delay Bound Segmentation
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current wireless communication networks face challenges in meeting end-to-end delay bound requirements, particularly in mission-critical applications where stringent latency and packet reliability are needed, as traditional scheduling methods often discard packets that exceed one-way delay bounds without considering the impact on the entire round-trip delay.
Innovation Solution
The solution involves transmitting timing information with data, indicating the remaining or elapsed end-to-end delay bound, allowing schedulers to adjust transmission latency on each hop to meet the overall deadline, thereby optimizing throughput and ensuring timely packet delivery.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If traditional scheduling methods are used to manage packet transmission, then device complexity is reduced and scheduling is simpler, but end-to-end delay bound requirements cannot be met and packet reliability deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the end-to-end delay bound into individual hop delay bounds. The network device receives first delay bound information representing the end-to-end delay bound, determines second delay bound information representing an individual hop delay bound based on the first delay bound information, and schedules packet transmission based on this segmented delay bound. This segmentation allows each hop to be managed independently while ensuring the overall end-to-end delay requirement is met, thereby improving packet reliability without requiring complex end-to-end coordination.
Solution Approach 2:
The patent applies preliminary action by determining the individual hop delay bound before scheduling the packet transmission. The network device calculates the allowable delay for each hop in advance based on the total end-to-end delay bound, then uses this pre-determined delay bound to schedule packet transmission. This preliminary determination of delay constraints enables the scheduler to make informed decisions that guarantee end-to-end delay requirements are met, improving reliability while keeping the scheduling mechanism manageable.
2Productivity
If packets exceeding one-way delay bounds are discarded to maintain scheduling simplicity, then device complexity is reduced, but end-to-end throughput deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The patent applies dynamics by making the delay bound adaptive rather than fixed. The network device determines an individual hop delay bound dynamically based on the received end-to-end delay bound information and current network conditions. This dynamic adjustment allows the scheduler to optimize packet transmission timing for each hop, maximizing throughput by utilizing available network resources while still guaranteeing that the overall end-to-end delay requirement is satisfied, without requiring complex retransmission protocols.
3Productivity
If timing information is transmitted with data to enable delay-based scheduling, then end-to-end throughput is improved and delay bounds are met, but loss of information increases due to additional signaling overhead
Solution Approach 1:
The patent extracts only the essential timing information needed for delay-bound scheduling from the complete packet data. Instead of transmitting or processing entire packets with full timing analysis, the network device extracts and schedules based on the critical delay bound parameter. This extraction approach minimizes the information handling overhead while still enabling effective delay-based scheduling, thereby improving throughput without proportionally increasing signaling overhead.
Data Source
AI summary
The disclosure relates in some aspects to scheduling data transmissions based on an end-to-end delay bound. In some aspects, timing information is transmitted in conjunction with data over a given hop, where the timing information is based on an end-to-end delay bound for the data transmission (e.g., according to a latency requirement). For example, the timing information may indicate the time remaining for transmission of a response to the data or the deadline for completing the response. A scheduler that receives the timing information may schedule another transmission (e.g., a response) based on the timing information.