Comparison of IEEE 802.11p and LTE-V2X: An Evaluation With Periodic and Aperiodic Messages of Constant and Variable Size

V2X (Vehicle to everything) communications can be currently supported by standards based on IEEE 802.11p (e.g. DSRC or ITS-G5) or LTE-V2X (also known as Cellular V2X or C-V2X) technologies. There has been an intense debate in the community on which technology achieves best performance. However, existing studies do not take into account the variability present in the generation and size of V2X messages. This variability can significantly impact the operation and performance of the Medium Access Control (MAC). This study progresses the state of the art by conducting an in-depth evaluation of both technologies under different message traffic patterns. In particular, we consider aperiodic and periodic messages of constant or variable size based on the standardized ETSI Cooperative Awareness Messages (CAMs). This study considers different scenarios and possible configurations of IEEE 802.11p and LTE-V2X. We demonstrate that IEEE 802.11p can better cope with variations in the size and time interval between messages. We also demonstrate (and characterize) that the LTE-V2X sensing-based semi-persistent scheduling faces certain inefficiencies when transmitting aperiodic messages of variable size. These inefficiencies result in that IEEE 802.11p generally outperforms LTE-V2X when transmitting aperiodic messages of variable size except when the channel load is very low.

[1]  Li Zhao,et al.  Link level performance comparison between LTE V2X and DSRC , 2017, Journal of Communications and Information Networks.

[2]  Li Zhao,et al.  The Performance Comparison of LTE-V2X and IEEE 802.11p , 2018, 2018 IEEE 87th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring).

[3]  An assessment of LTE-V2X (PC5) and 802.11p direct communications technologies for improved road safety in the EU , 2017 .

[4]  Jérôme Härri,et al.  A First Investigation of Congestion Control for LTE-V2X Mode 4 , 2019, 2019 15th Annual Conference on Wireless On-demand Network Systems and Services (WONS).

[5]  Javier Gozálvez,et al.  System Level Evaluation of LTE-V2V Mode 4 Communications and Its Distributed Scheduling , 2017, 2017 IEEE 85th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring).

[6]  Javier Gozálvez,et al.  Configuration of the C-V2X Mode 4 Sidelink PC5 Interface for Vehicular Communication , 2018, 2018 14th International Conference on Mobile Ad-Hoc and Sensor Networks (MSN).

[7]  Javier Gozalvez,et al.  LTE-V for Sidelink 5G V2X Vehicular Communications: A New 5G Technology for Short-Range Vehicle-to-Everything Communications , 2017, IEEE Vehicular Technology Magazine.

[8]  Qi Chen,et al.  Overhaul of ieee 802.11 modeling and simulation in ns-2 , 2007, MSWiM '07.

[9]  Javier Gozalvez,et al.  Empirical Models for the Realistic Generation of Cooperative Awareness Messages in Vehicular Networks , 2020, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology.

[10]  Alessio Filippi,et al.  IEEE802.11p ahead of LTE-V2V for safety applications , 2017 .

[11]  Alessio Filippi,et al.  C-ITS: Three observations on LTE-V2X and ETSI-ITS G5 , 2018 .

[12]  Yong Liang Guan,et al.  Performance Analysis of IEEE 802.11p Safety Message Broadcast With and Without Relaying at Road Intersection , 2018, IEEE Access.

[13]  Kapil Gulati,et al.  A comparison of cellular vehicle-to-everything and dedicated short range communication , 2017, 2017 IEEE Vehicular Networking Conference (VNC).

[14]  Min Wang,et al.  Comparison of LTE and DSRC-Based Connectivity for Intelligent Transportation Systems , 2017, 2017 IEEE 85th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC Spring).

[15]  Barbara M. Masini,et al.  Optimizing the Resource Allocation of Periodic Messages With Different Sizes in LTE-V2V , 2019, IEEE Access.

[16]  Miguel Sepulcre,et al.  Analytical Models of the Performance of C-V2X Mode 4 Vehicular Communications , 2018, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology.

[17]  Vuk Marojevic,et al.  Performance Analysis of Sensing-Based Semi-Persistent Scheduling in C-V2X Networks , 2018, 2018 IEEE 88th Vehicular Technology Conference (VTC-Fall).

[18]  Barbara M. Masini,et al.  Study of the Impact of PHY and MAC Parameters in 3GPP C-V2V Mode 4 , 2018, IEEE Access.

[19]  Miguel Sepulcre,et al.  Why 6 Mbps is Not (Always) the Optimum Data Rate for Beaconing in Vehicular Networks , 2017, IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing.

[20]  Voon Chin Phua,et al.  Wireless lan medium access control (mac) and physical layer (phy) specifications , 1999 .

[21]  Guidelines for evaluation of radio interface technologies for IMT-Advanced , 2008 .