Wireless Traffic Scheduling With QoS And UE Priority Queues
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing wireless networks struggle to provide granular control over Quality of Service (QoS) parameters and Service Level Agreements (SLAs) by efficiently scheduling and sequencing traffic based on multiple factors, leading to potential packet loss and delays for UEs with varying priority levels.
Innovation Solution
Implementing a multi-factor scheduling approach in wireless networks that re-sequences traffic based on QoS indicators and UE attributes, using techniques like Data Plane Development Kit (DPDK) and Weighted Fair Queuing (WFQ), and incorporating round-robin and UE priority methodologies to optimize packet delivery.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Reliability
If traffic is scheduled based on simple QoS parameters only, then scheduling is straightforward and easy to implement, but granular control over QoS and SLAs cannot be achieved, leading to packet loss and delays for UEs with varying priority levels
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments traffic scheduling into multiple independent queues (e.g., high priority queue, low priority queue) based on QoS parameters and UE attributes. Each queue is handled by dedicated scheduling logic, enabling granular QoS control while maintaining manageable complexity through modular design. This segmentation allows different scheduling strategies to be applied to different traffic types simultaneously.
Solution Approach 2:
The scheduling mechanism dynamically adjusts queue selection and scheduling parameters based on real-time QoS requirements and UE priority levels. The system transitions from static scheduling to dynamic multi-factor scheduling, where scheduling decisions are adapted continuously based on changing network conditions and service requirements, enabling granular control without overwhelming complexity.
2Reliability
If multi-factor scheduling is implemented to achieve granular QoS control, then QoS treatment consistency is improved, but scheduling complexity and processing overhead increase
Solution Approach 1:
The patent divides the scheduling mechanism into separate processing stages: QoS parameter evaluation, UE attribute assessment, queue selection, and packet scheduling. Each stage handles a specific aspect of the multi-factor decision-making process, improving QoS consistency while keeping individual components simple and manageable. This staged segmentation reduces overall complexity by breaking down the complex scheduling task into smaller, independent modules.
Solution Approach 2:
Different scheduling algorithms and parameters are applied locally to different queues and traffic types based on their specific QoS requirements. High priority traffic receives dedicated scheduling treatment while low priority traffic uses different scheduling parameters, enabling consistent QoS treatment for each service type without requiring a single complex universal scheduler.
3Productivity
If traffic from multiple UEs is processed in a single sequence, then network resource utilization is maximized, but lower priority UEs experience excessive packet loss or delay
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments the single traffic sequence into multiple priority-based queues. Traffic from different UEs is classified into appropriate queues based on QoS parameters and UE attributes. This segmentation ensures that high priority packets are processed and transmitted first, guaranteeing their delivery reliability, while low priority packets are handled in subsequent time slots, maintaining overall network throughput without excessive loss for any single UE.
Solution Approach 2:
The scheduler employs periodic time slots or scheduling intervals where different priority queues are serviced in a systematic sequence. High priority queues are serviced in early time slots, followed by lower priority queues in subsequent slots. This periodic scheduling pattern ensures that network resources are fully utilized across all UEs while guaranteeing that lower priority UEs do not experience excessive delays or packet loss.
4Ease of operation
If standard scheduling is used without UE-specific considerations, then scheduling is simple and fast, but fairness and user experience deteriorate for UEs with different priority levels
Solution Approach 1:
The patent segments UE attributes (e.g., priority level, service type, device category) into discrete classification criteria that map to specific scheduling behaviors. This segmentation allows the system to maintain simple scheduling logic within each segment while achieving overall fairness and good user experience across different UE types through the segmented approach.
Data Source
AI summary
A device described herein, such as a User Plane Function (“UPF”) of a core network or some other network element, may receive traffic associated with a first User Equipment (“UE”) and a second UE. The traffic may include a first set of packets associated with the first UE and a second set of packets associated with the second UE. The first and second packets may be received in a first sequence. The device may generate a second sequence by re-sequencing the received traffic based on Quality of Service (“QoS”) parameters associated with the traffic, such as 5G QoS Identifier (“5QI”) values. The device may generate a third sequence by re-sequencing the second sequence based on parameters associated with at least the first UE or the second UE. The device may output at least a portion of the received traffic in accordance with the third sequence.