Cooperative and Non-Cooperative Control in IEEE 802.11 WLANs

Numerous algorithms and techniques for optimal performance of an IEEE 802.11 WLAN have been investigated by researchers. These algorithms make use of either power control or PHY (physical layer) rate control (i.e., adaptive selection of PHY rates) or both to achieve maximum throughput levels for the network at minimum power consumption by the mobile devices. However most of these techniques are non-cooperative by definition (i.e., they attempt to maximize an individual node's performance and not the overall network performance). In this report, we analyse cooperative and non-cooperative rate and power control based on an expression for the throughput of a node in an 802.11 WLAN that uses the Distributed Coordination Function (DCF) with an RTS/CTS frame exchange. We formulate a payoff function comprising of the throughput and costs related to power consumption of a mobile node. The payoff function is optimized and closed form expressions for the optimal PHY rate are obtained. In the cooperative approach we seek to obtain the optimal rates under two different scenarios - max-min fair rate and global multirate allocation. In the non-cooperative game approach we consider only multirate allocation. Our main contribution is that we obtain explicit expressions for the optimal PHY rate which in turn can be used to compute explicit expressions for the throughput. We consider optimization problems for both finite number of nodes n and for the limit $n \to\infty$. Single node throughputs corresponding tothe optimal PHY rates are numerically studied and it is observed that network performance in the cooperative scenario is superior than in the non-cooperative scenario.

[1]  J. W. Cohen,et al.  The multiple phase service network with generalized processor sharing , 1979, Acta Informatica.

[2]  Srikanth V. Krishnamurthy,et al.  Distributed power control in ad-hoc wireless networks , 2001, 12th IEEE International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications. PIMRC 2001. Proceedings (Cat. No.01TH8598).

[3]  Kang G. Shin,et al.  MiSer: an optimal low-energy transmission strategy for IEEE 802.11a/h , 2003, MobiCom '03.

[4]  John V. Guttag,et al.  The 802.11 MAC protocol leads to inefficient equilibria , 2005, Proceedings IEEE 24th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies..

[5]  Feng Zhao,et al.  Exploiting Physical Layer Power Control Mechanisms in IEEE 802 . 11 b Network Interfaces , 2001 .

[6]  J. Goodman Note on Existence and Uniqueness of Equilibrium Points for Concave N-Person Games , 1965 .

[7]  Leo Monteban,et al.  WaveLAN®-II: A high-performance wireless LAN for the unlicensed band , 1997, Bell Labs Technical Journal.

[8]  Paramvir Bahl,et al.  A rate-adaptive MAC protocol for multi-Hop wireless networks , 2001, MobiCom '01.

[9]  Eitan Altman,et al.  Fixed point analysis of single cell IEEE 802.11e WLANs: uniqueness, multistability and throughput differentiation , 2005, SIGMETRICS '05.

[10]  A. Girotra,et al.  Performance Analysis of the IEEE 802 . 11 Distributed Coordination Function , 2005 .

[11]  Mahmoud Naghshineh,et al.  Conserving transmission power in wireless ad hoc networks , 2001, Proceedings Ninth International Conference on Network Protocols. ICNP 2001.

[12]  Eitan Altman,et al.  New Insights From a Fixed-Point Analysis of Single Cell IEEE 802.11 WLANs , 2007, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[13]  Marco Gruteser,et al.  Exploiting Physical Layer Power Control Mechanisms in IEEE 802.11b Network Interfaces ; CU-CS-924-01 , 2001 .