IEEE Communications Magazine • October 2003
75
through to their respective destinations as quick-
ly as possible. Individual user data flows react to
congestion in the network and adapt their trans-
mission rate with the aim of minimizing conges-
tion. Email service is often provided on a best
effort basis.
D
IFFERENCES BETWEEN
W
IRELINE AND
WIRELESS
NETWORKS
Both wireless and wireline networks need to sup-
port the different network data service types
described in the previous section. The focus of
this article is on supporting such services over
wireless networks, and the gains that can be
accrued by cross-layer techniques which do away
with the firm boundary that currently exists
between the PHY and MAC layers, and the
higher layers of the network protocol stack.
Before studying mechanisms by which data ser-
vices can be supported over wireless networks,
we briefly describe the characteristics of wireless
systems. Based on limited frequency allocations
and channel considerations, wireless networks
have peculiarities that distinguish them from
conventional wireline networks.
•The wireless channel varies over time and
space and has short-term (or small-scale) memo-
ry due to multipath. These variations are caused
by either motion of the wireless device or
changes in the surrounding physical environ-
ment, and lead to detector errors. This causes
bursts of errors to occur during which packets
cannot be successfully transmitted on the link.
Small-scale channel variations due to fading are
such that states of different channels can asyn-
chronously switch from “good” to “bad” within a
few milliseconds and vice versa. Furthermore,
very strong forward error correction codes (i.e.,
very low rates) cannot be used to eliminate
errors because this technique leads to reduced
spectral efficiency.
•In addition to small-scale channel variations,
there are also spatio-temporal variations on a
much greater timescale [2]. Large-scale channel
variation means that the average channel state
condition depends on user locations and inter-
ference levels. Thus, due to small-scale and
large-scale changes in the channel, some users
may inherently demand more channel access
time than others based on their location or
mobile velocity, even if their data rate require-
ment is the same as or less than other users.
Later we discuss the implications of these
effects for supporting data services over wireless
networks.
CROSS-LAYER DESIGN FOR
SUPPORTING DATA SERVICES OVER
WIRELESS NETWORKS
In this section we explore the gains that can be
achieved by means of a cross-layer approach,
where physical layer information is passed to the
higher layers. We first consider supporting TCP
traffic over wireless links, and then consider sup-
porting data services in a multi-user wireless net-
work. We finally discuss deployment tools and
practical issues facing the buildout of access
points, based on network throughput require-
ments.
TCP
OVER WIRELESS LINKS
The prevalent protocol for data transport over
the Internet is Transmission Control Protocol
(TCP). TCP is a connection-oriented end-to-end
data transfer protocol. It has two objectives:
• Reliable end-to-end transmission of data,
achieved by error or loss detection and
retransmission
• Congestion control over the Internet
Routers in the network indicate congestion by
dropping packets, which in turn causes the
source to adaptively decrease its sending rate.
Future deployment of TCP is expected to
include the Explicit Congestion Notification
(ECN) mechanism [3] used to notify the
receiver whenever congestion occurs in the
network. This mechanism works in the follow-
ing manner: included in a TCP packet’s head-
er is the ECN bit which is set to zero by the
source. If the router detects congestion, it will
set the ECN bit to one, and the packet is said
to be marked. The marked packet eventually
reaches the destination, which in turn informs
the source about the value of the mark (i.e.,
the ECN bit value). The source adapts its
transmission rate depending on the value of
the mark.
The current deployment of the TCP protocol
interprets all losses as being congestion related.
Whenever losses occur over a wireless channel,
the TCP source reacts to this as though it was
due to congestion and thus decreases the packet
transmission rate, causing loss in network
throughput. A solution that has been proposed
to mitigate this problem is to “smooth” the
channel by suitable coding and link layer auto-
matic repeat request (ARQ) at a faster
timescale than that of the TCP control loop [4]
(additional references available in [5]) so that
the wireless link ideally is perceived as a constant
channel, but with lower capacity. However, in
practice, there is still the problem that the TCP
sender may not be fully shielded from wireless
link losses. This can lead to the TCP congestion
control mechanism reacting to packet losses,
thus resulting in redundant retransmissions and
loss of throughput.
However, once ECN-enabled TCP is
deployed, where the ECN bit can be used to
mark packets to indicate congestion, there is a
means of differentiating between congestion
related loss and wireless channel related loss.
Thus, the channel need not be smoothed
because the ECN mechanism provides a means
of explicitly indicating congestion. In [6] it was
analytically shown that in a single user environ-
ment, if packets are marked based solely on
congestion information, there is no significant
degradation of TCP performance due to the
time varying nature of the wireless channel as
compared to wired networks. A similar idea
based on explicit loss notification has been dis-
cussed in [4], where simulations indicate
Once ECN-
enabled TCP is
deployed, where
the ECN bit can
be used to mark
packets to
indicate congestion,
there is a means
of differentiating
between
congestion related
loss and wireless
channel related
loss.