Analysis of Packet Reordering Delay For Bandwidth Aggregation in Heterogeneous Wireless Networks

IPASJ International Journal of Information Technology (IIJIT)
Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJIT/IIJIT.htm

A Publisher for Research Motivation ........ Email:editoriijit@ipasj.org
Volume 6, Issue 7, July 2018 ISSN 2321-5976
Analysis of Packet Reordering Delay for

Bandwidth Aggregation in Heterogeneous
Wireless Networks
Farhat Anwar1, Mosharrof H.Masud2, Burhan Ul Islam Khan*3, Rashidah F. Olanrewaju4and
Suhaimi A.Latif5
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering
International Islamic University Malaysia
Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
*Corresponding author, e-mail: burhan.iium@gmail.com
ABSTRACT
Bandwidth aggregation in heterogeneous wireless networks (HWN) can be one of the effective solutions in providing quality
data transmission for real-time applications. However, transmitting the data through multiple networks create packet
reordering issues that result in transmission delay and degrades the overall quality of services. This paper addresses packet
reordering issues both for single and multiple paths with a reordering delay in the transmission system. An algorithm has
proposed to mitigate the associated delay that has been simulated in network simulator 3 (NS3). The simulation results have
benchmarked with the well known Earliest Delivery Path First (EDPF) method and shown better performance over the EDPF
results. Moreover, the simulation has been done to analyze the packet scheduling including to measuring packet reordering
delay, and reordering entropy. CBR and VBR applications have been transmitted for 1800ms from sender to receiver in a
heterogeneous wireless environment created in NS3. The results show the proposed method achieved to reduce the reordering
delay and reordering entropy both for CBR and VBR applications.
Keywords:about four key words separated by commas
1. INTRODUCTION
Heterogeneous Wireless Network (HWN) is a next-generation wireless communication system platform that provides
Internet services through various technologies such as WiFi, WiMAX, 3G and LTE. Some Internet applications require
high bandwidth, so bandwidth aggregation has long been considered as one of the effective solutions for high
bandwidth demand applications in HWN. A Multimode Device (MD) user can access any of these resources based on
the application requirements running on his device. The most popular and available wireless technologies are cellular,
followed by WiFi and WiMAX. Therefore, integrating these different bandwidths into the MD can play an essential
role in improving the performance of real-time applications. In a heterogeneous wireless network, MD users can switch
between different Radio Access Technologies (RATs) and select the most suitable RAT for their application. For a
typical scenario, the general architecture of the HWN is shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1General architecture of HWN
Volume 6, Issue 7, July 2018 Page 9

If no single RAT has enough bandwidth to satisfy the required application, multiple RATs can be selected, and their
bandwidth can be aggregated to create a single logical link with sufficient bandwidth to serve the application [1]. With
the concept of the HWN environment, multimode devices are connected to the default interface and the other two
interfaces are also available. If the default interface cannot transfer expected data, the different available interfaces can
establish a logical link to move that data. Figure 2 illustrates the concept in which the default interface, 3G cannot
process data and therefore collaborates with other interfaces to form a logical link.
Figure 2Logical link in HWN
However, sharing available resources does not guarantee efficient real-time data transfer. Delay, packet loss, and
packet reordering can happen by sharing multiple routes. Therefore, inconsistencies need to be resolved by designing
an appropriate resource sharing scheme to ensure that data is transmitted sequentially from the same sender and
application.
Existing operating systems such as Windows, Linux, MAC OS, and mobile devices use only one RAT at a time, even
if there are multiple RATs available [2] resulting in underutilization of wireless resources. Transmission Control
Protocol (TCP) is the primary protocol for the Internet for data transmission, supporting a single RAT at a time. Today,
due to advances in technology and the need to connect to the MD, multiple RATs can be used. TCP is designed for
sequential delivery, and out-of-order delivery is considered a particular case of network congestion. However, in
heterogeneous environments, out-of-order packet delivery is widespread, so multiple interfaces need to be supported, so
TCP enhancements have been completed. The most popular TCP enhancement is SCTP, which supports various RATs
at a time, for bandwidth aggregation [2]. Resource sharing or bandwidth aggregation in HWN is one of the useful
solutions for efficient data transmission. Many solutions have been proposed to solve this multi-standard decision
algorithm in HWN.
2. RELATED WORK
Earliest Delivery Path First (EDPF) is one of the vital network based bandwidth aggregation solutions [3]. The goal of
EDPF is to transmit packets on multiple available interfaces in the shortest amount of time [1]. The critical feature of
EDPF is to dynamically estimate the transmission time of the next packet on each link. Based on the shortest delivery
time for each path, EDPF passes the packet to that path. Estimate the shortest delivery time according to (1) below.
l Li
d i  MAX ( a i  D l , A l ) 
Bi (1)
Where, ai and Li represent the estimated delivery time of packet i via path l, the arrival time of packet i at the network
proxy, and the length of packet i, respectively. D l , A l and Bl represent the delay from the proxy to the base station on
path l, the time when path l is available for transmission and the bandwidth of path l, respectively. The first portion of
the equation determines the time at which the transmission can resume on path l, and the second portion returns the
packet transmission time along the path. However, EDPF cannot fully utilize the bandwidth of a selected set of
interfaces because it chooses one interface at a time for transporting packets during a transport session. Besides, it only
considers path bandwidth and latency that ignore packet loss rates [1].
2.1 Packet scheduling
Transmitting real-time data of multiple sessions over the same node link requires a guaranteed quality of services
(QoS). Hence, the concept of traffic schedulers comes that divide the bandwidth and create small data traffic for the
easy transmission. These traffic flows take precedence over IP-based network forwarding and need adequate bandwidth
allocation and strict network latency control. Real-time traffic scheduling has been developed to share bandwidth across
the network. One of the main goals of real-time scheduling is to provide smooth transmission of real-time applications
over the network, such as video conferencing, voice, and so on. There are various real-time traffic schedulers, and
problems have been solved on WLANs based on the IEEE 802.11 standard [4]. In the WLN, each class requires
sufficient bandwidth resources and effective channel capacity to guarantee (QoS). How to balance QoS and channel
efficiency in WLN [5, 6, 7]. Packet forwarding scheduling is an important issue that needs to be resolved in HWN.
2.2 Packet reordering

Packet reordering occurs when the order of the packets of the same stream at the receiver is different from the order of
the same packets at the sender [8]. Reordering of packets in the HWN can result in simultaneous transmission of the
same stream through multiple interfaces with different transmission delays and rates. The concept of packet reordering
in HWN is shown in Figure 3. The sender applies the appropriate scheduling algorithm to each packet and forwards the
packet to the suitable interface based on availability, delay, jitter, and other parameters, namely WiFi, WiMAX, and
3G. The receiver merges and organizes all the packets based on the serial number. Packet loss, packet reordering, and
HWN latency are significant concerns when applying bandwidth aggregation. An Adaptive Self-timer Multi-server
(ASM) scheduling algorithm has been designed to solve the above problem [9]. It has been observed that the issue of
packet reordering and packet dropping is solved, but the interference of the interface is not well resolved. To avoid
interference and coordinate these available interfaces as MMD is a challenge.
Figure 3 Packet reordering in HWN
This packet reordering will reduce the quality of real-time applications. Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) may
also be affected by packet reordering [1], and it is not optimal for multi-interface processing. However, Stream Control
Transmission Protocol (SCTP) is best suited for multi-interface processing.
Packet reordering is one of the challenging issues in designing bandwidth aggregation in HWN. It has been observed
that packet reordering in a single TCP link is a rare event and the event does not occur for more than 3% [10].
However, when packets are transmitted over multiple paths, the rate of packet reordering in heterogeneous wireless
networks exceeds 30% [11]. Packet reordering can have many reasons but is not limited to the following reasons [12]:
(i) in heterogeneous wireless networks that apply bandwidth aggregation [13], [14], (ii) when older packets are placed
in longer queues and later packets are placed in shorter in the queue, (iii) retransmissions over the wireless link due to
TCP, (iv) give lower priority and provide placement in different queues, (v) route oscillations and (vi) handover
sessions at the mobile node period. Packet reordering can significantly affect TCP and UDP applications. In the case of
TCP, when the packets are out of order in the forward path, the receiver can treat the packets as lost, which reduces the
congestion window and increases the number of retransmissions [12], [15-17]. In the case of UDP, especially for real-
time applications, after the playback time lapse is considered lost, the reordered packets arrive, which reduces the
quality of the application.
2.2.1 Packet Reordering over a Single Path
Packet reordering is relatively low on a single path. Due to multipath routing, route flapping, and retransmissions,
packet reordering may occur in traditional TCP/UDP [11]. It causes unnecessary packet retransmissions and therefore

creates congestion on the network. It has been noted that since the interval with the sender is short, packet transmission
over UDP at a higher rate is more when the packet size is small [18]. It has also been observed that packet reordering
occurs at different rates in different paths, where the probability of transmitting the same UDP packet.
2.2.2 Packet Reordering over Multiple Paths
Packet reordering is a common phenomenon in heterogeneous wireless networks when packets of the same application
are sent over multiple paths. These packets must be reordered in the receiver buffer, which can cause excessive delays
and degrade the quality of real-time services [11]. Initially, a sizeable buffering scheme was proposed to avoid packet
loss at the receiver, but this is not an effective solution because it increases network latency and cost [14]. A multi-link
proxy-based architecture has been developed that divides traffic into different paths [3]. The Multipath Transmission
Control Scheme (MTCS) combines the bandwidth of available interfaces and schedules packets for real-time
applications in heterogeneous environments [19]. A packet-based multipath selection (GMS) mechanism was developed
to avoid potential sharing bottlenecks between topologically associated paths [20]. GMS simulation results show
superiority to other existing multipath solutions. A scheduling mechanism for interactive multimedia transmission over
heterogeneous wireless networks is proposed [21].
2.2.3 Packet Reordering Metrics
Reordering Density (RD): Several metrics have been introduced to quantify, namely Reordering Density (RD) and
Reordering Buffer occupancy Density (RBD) are considered informative and useful metrics [22]. The RD may be
referred to as a distribution of packet displacements from the original location, with first packets representing negative
displacements and late packets corresponding to positive displacements. It has been normalized to the number of
packets in the original sequence. RD has proven to be an essential indicator of inclusive information for reordering IP
packets [1]. The concept of RD can be well understood from the following explanation [22].
Consider a sequence of packets (1,2…N) transmitted over a network. A Receiver Index (RI) (1,2…) is assigned to
each packet as they arrive at the destination. Lost and duplicate packets are not included in the RI. If the RI assigned to
packet m is (m + dm ), with dm ≠ 0, then packet reorder event has occurred, and this event is denoted by r(m, dm).
When packet reorder does not happen, then the sequence of the packet and the RI is the same, i.e., dm = 0 for each
packet. A packet can be considered as late if dm> 0, and early if dm< 0. Therefore, the sequence of packet reordering R
is represented by the union of reorder events, R is shown in (2).
R   r m, d m  | d m  0
(2)
Arrived Sequence 1 2 5 4 3 7 6 8
Receive Index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Displacement 0 0 -2 0 2 -1 1 0
R = {(3, 2), (5, -2), (6, 1), (7, -1)}
RD[0] = 4/8, RD[1] = 1/8, RD[-1] = 1/8,
RD[2] = 1/8, RD[-2] = 1/8
Figure 4 Reorder Displacement (RD) Calculation
RD is defined as the histogram of dm values, normalized with respect to the total number of packets, which has been
adjusted for losses and duplicates. Figure 4 or 5 illustrates the sequence, assigned receive index values and
displacements as well as the corresponding reorder set and RD for a sequence. In this example, packet 6 and packet 3
are displaced by one and two unit from their positions; thus the density components are 1/8 and 2/8, respectively.
Packet 7 and packet 5 are early by one and two places respectively with the RD 1/8 and 2/8. Finally, the RD for zero is
4/8.
Reorder Buffer-occupancy Density (RBD): RBD is the normalized buffer that allows recovery from out-of-order
delivery of the packets. If the arrival packet is early than expected, then it can be added in the hypothetical buffer until
it can be released in order [22]. After the arrival of each packet, the occupancy of the buffer is used as the measure of
reordering.

Arrive Sequence 1 2 3 4 7 5 6 8
Expected 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Buffer-occupancy 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0
RBD[0] = 6/8, RBD[1] = 2/8
Figure 5 Reorder Buffer-occupancy Density (RBD) Calculation
For the sequence (1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 5, 6, 8) shown in Figure 4 or 5, the packet with the sequence number 7 arrives the
buffer-occupancy is 1 because it arrives when 5 is expected. The buffer occupancy remains 1 when packet 5 arrives.
2.2.4 Analysis of Packet Reordering Delay
In a wireless communication system, two types of delay can occur, namely fixed or propagation and variable or queuing
m (m )
m
Q
delay. Consider D p and p are propagation and queuing delay respectively, and overall delay d p can be denoted as
shown in (3) where m represents the packets that have been transmitted over path p.
(m ) m
d p  D mp  Q
(3) p
In a heterogeneous wireless network, packets m is transmitted over multiple paths, for example, two paths are
considered, in this case, i and j. The delay of packet reordering can be measured based on (4) [23].
( m 1 ) m
 (im, j)  d  d
i j
(4)
for  i  j
|  (i ,mj ) |
is the most desirable value that needs to be minimized for real-time applications.
In a heterogeneous environment, packet reordering occurs due to packet splitting and path switching into available
interfaces based on the probabilistic measurements [23]. The probability of packet reordering  r can be measured
based on (5) [23], [24].
(m ) (m )
 r   s    i, j  ( i, j )
i P j P
(5)
( m )
Where  s is the probability of overall splitting of packets and  i , j is the probability of path switching from path i
to path j and P is the parallel path. This indicates that (m-1)th packet will be transmitted through path i and mth packet
( m )
will be forwarded via path j.

 (  i, j
)
represents the conditional probability of packet reordering when the path
(m )
switches from i to j that is the function of 
( m )
 0
i, j
which has been shown in (3). It can be said that if  i , j
then
(m )
indicates that packet reordering risk exists. Otherwise, if  (  )  0
( m )
 ( )  0 i, j
i , j
, packet reordering will
(m )
never happen. The smaller value of |  i , j | indicates the lesser risk of packet reordering.
3. PACKET SCHEDULING ALGORITHM

Capacity: This expression represents the maximum possible rate of information transmission through a given channel
or system. The maximum rate, we can transmit information is set by the bandwidth, the signal level and the noise
level. C is therefore called the channel's information carrying Capacity.
Capacity,
C i  B i log 2 1  S N   (6)
Delay:This is the difference in time between transmission from the source and arrival at the destination. Various
statistics such as maximum delay, minimum delay and the variance of the delay are used when describing the delay
characteristic as a given scheduling algorithms exhibit. The average delay of the i’th flow can be expressed by:

1 N
Di   rt i  j   tt i  j 
Delay, N j 0 (7)
where tti (j) is the time when the jth packet of the ith flow is transmitted from its source, rti (j) is the time when the
jth packet of the ith flow is received by the receiver and N is the number of packets used for calculating the average
delay.
1. Queue (Q) of packets to the scheduler, active set A

2. Initialize minimum delay threshold for each interface Thmin
3. Compute packet size and required bandwidth RB, and add the packet serial
number, Pi
4. Check available interface or links (Li)
5. Calculate the capacity Ci and delay Di for each interface as shown in
equations (6) and (7)
6. If the capacity Ci < RBi & Delay Di > Thmin
a. Scan for all available links Li
b. for (i= 1 to Ln)
7. Assign Pi to Ln
Pi++
Q--
If Q is empty then
Exit round allocation
End if
Else repeat Steps 4 to 7
8. Else if Ci >= RBi
9. Assign Pi to Ln
4. PERFORMANCE ANALYSIS
The well-known simulation tools currently do not support Heterogeneous Wireless Network (HWN) although many
simulation environments and tools support various technologies, including WiFi, WiMAX, Bluetooth, and Cellular
(LTE). All the existing simulation tools focus on a single technology. NS3 has some additional features, and hence,
NS3 simulation tool has been considered to measure the packet reordering.
To simulate the reordering pattern of packets in HWN, NS3 tool has been utilized. To measure the packet reordering
delay, a heterogeneous wireless network has been designed which consist of 20 users (UE), 2 RAT from cellular
networks (LTE), 2 AP from WiFi networks and 1 AP from WiMAX networks. It has been shown in figure 4 that the
users have been assigned in appropriate links in NS3.
4.1 Simulation Setup
The well-known simulation tools currently do not support Heterogeneous Wireless Network (HWN) although many
simulation environments and tools support various technologies, including WiFi, WiMAX, Bluetooth, and Cellular
(LTE). All the existing simulation tools focus on a single technology. NS3 has some additional features, and hence,
NS3 simulation tool has been considered to measure the packet reordering. To measure the performance of packet
reordering in HWN, the proposed packet reordering model has been compared with the well known EDPF scheduling
model on NS3. EDPF model has been selected since the packet meets playback deadlines according to the delivery
time. Moreover, it is more suitable to measure the performance in heterogeneous wireless environment.
Two video applications have been considered in this simulation, namely; CBR and VBR. CBR is a constant bitrate
application with 2Mbps data rate where VBR is a variable bitrate, and the video traces have been accessed from [25].
The Die Hard III movie video traces file with high quality has been utilized where the peak rate is 2.6Mbps and the
mean rate is 720Kbps for VBR application. The duration of the video transmission on the simulator is 1800 seconds. It
has been considered that two Multimode Devices (MD) are connected as a sender and receiver in the heterogeneous
wireless environments where three types of network technologies are available.
To measure the packet reordering delay, a heterogeneous wireless network has been designed which consist of 20
users (UE), 2 RAT from cellular networks (LTE), 2 AP from WiFi networks and 1 AP from WiMAX networks. It has

been shown in Figure 6 that the users have been assigned in appropriate links in NS3. The CBR and VBR applications
have been transmitted from sender to receiver. The performance of the proposed model in terms of packet reordering
delay and packet reordering entropy have been compared and benchmarked with the EDPF model. The packet
reordering delay and packet reordering entropy have been measured both in single path transmission and multiple path
transmission systems. In single path transmission, only one network technology is considered where various paths,
three network technologies have been undertaken.
Figure 6 Users Node assigning in HWN using NS3 tool.
The HWN has been designed in such a way that three networks have overlapped in the same geographical area.
Figure 7 has been illustrated with the Sender Node (SN) and Receiver Node (RN) with yellow color, cellular LTE Enb
in green color, WiMAX with black color, WiFi with blue color and users are in red. The scheduling algorithmhas been
applied in the sending and receiving side to manage the packets to transmit over the multiple available networks. Using
the scheduling algorithm, the delay, jitter and throughput have been measured. It has been assumed that the users UE
move randomly.
Figure 7 Simulation Scenario on NS3
As mentioned in chapter three this research has focused on three aspects of measuring of voice, video and file
downloading packets in an HWN. The simulation has been designed for three perspectives and a typical simulation

scenario has been shown in Figure 8.
Figure 8 Simulation Scenario on NS3
The purpose of this simulation is to measure the packet loss for these three categories that results in a delay of the
packet transmission and degrades the quality of service. A delay analysismeasurement has been shown in Figure 9.
Figure 9 Delay Analysis on NS3
According to the simulation setup mentioned in the previous section, the performance analysis has been conducted
using NS3 simulator. Two performance metrics have been analyzed, namely, packet reordering delay and packet
reordering entropy both for the single and multiple paths in a heterogeneous wireless environment. The same
simulation has been conducted for several times and results have been extracted from the simulator to be analyzed. The

mean value has been calculated from the conclusion of each simulation run and plotted using a Matlab tool both for
CBR and VBR applications. The proposed method has been benchmarked with the EDPF packet reordering model both
for a single and multiple paths. The analysis has been conducted using Matlab tools.
4.2 Single Path Analysis
Packet reordering delay has been analyzed for a single path in NS3 simulator and plotted in Matlab tools. The delay has
been measured in milliseconds represented in Y-axis and the simulation conducted for 1800 seconds represented in X-
axis depicted in Figure 10. The propagation delay of the network path is noted 58ms (Ref.). CBR and VBR
applications have been run on the simulator where both applications delay has been compared with EDPF method. It
can be noted from the figure that the average delay has been recorded of VBR application for EDPF method is 180ms to
200ms whereas CBR application remarked around 170ms on average over the simulation time. The proposed plan
shows an improvement over the EDPF method of packet reordering in terms of reducing the delay. The proposed
method recorded around 100ms to 120ms for VBR application and 100ms to 110ms for CBR applications. It can also
be noted that the delay increases gradually with respect to simulation time in both methods.
Figure 10 Packet Reordering Delay on Single Path
Reorder entropy can be defined as the disorder of the packets from the receiver sequence. Higher reorder entropy
indicates the highest number of packet displacement that results in the delay in packet transmission. Reordering
entropy has been shown in Figure 11. CBR and VBR applications using EDPF method have been recorded for
reordering entropy from 5 to 15 for the whole simulation time. The proposed method achieves lower reordering entropy
than EDPF that ranges from 3 to 10. Reordering entropy increases gradually both for CBR and VBR applications using
the proposed method and shows a significant improvement over the EDPF method in the single path network.
Figure 11 Packet Reordering entropy on Single Path

4.3 Multiple Path Analysis
Packet reordering is very crucial in the multipath heterogeneous network environment. The philosophy behind this
reducing reordering delay is delivering lower sequence number packets through low bandwidth network paths whereas
higher sequence number packets delivered through high bandwidth network paths. The sender splits the packets

through multiple available networks and the receiver merges the packets based on the sequence number. Packet
reordering can be calculated at the receiver end. It has been observed from the simulation results that the packet
reordering delay is much higher in multiple paths than the single path due to the heterogeneous environment as
depicted in Figure 12. According to the figure, the VBR and the CBR applications using the EDPF method the delay
ranges from 300ms to 360ms. The proposed method has improved to reduce the delay for both applications less than
200ms. The delay of VBR application in the proposed method is higher than the CBR application. Generally, it can be
said that the packet reordering delay in the multipath network has been reduced by around 40% compared to the EDPF
method.
Figure 12 Packet Reordering Delay on Multiple Paths
The simulation results of reordering entropy for multipath networks have been shown in Figure 13. The entropy
delay of CBR and VBR applications have been remarked from 10 to 20 over the simulation time using EDPF method.
The proposed method reduced the number of entropy from 5 to 12 for both applications. Reduction of reordering
entropy results in less packet reordering delay and hence the proposed method improved the overall performance of the
packet transmission in heterogeneous networks.
Figure 13 Packet Reordering entropy on Multiple Path
5. CONCLUSION
It has been observed from the above results that the delay is relatively lower in single path compared to multiple path
networks. Similarly, the reordering entropy for a single path is also lower with respect to various path heterogeneous
networks. The delay and reordering entropy have been reduced by 40% on average both for CBR and VBR applications.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This work was partially supported by Ministry of Higher Education Malaysia (Kementerian Pendidikan Tinggi) under
Fundamental Research Grant Scheme (FRGS) number FRGS13-081-0322.
References
[1] A.L. Ramaboli, O.E. Falowo, A.H. Chan, “Bandwidth Aggregation in Heterogeneous Wireless Networks: A
Survey of Current Approaches and Issues,” Journal of Network and Computer Applications, XXXV (6), pp.
1674-1690, 2012.
[2] K. Habak, K.A. Harras, M. Youssef, “Bandwidth Aggregation Techniques in Heterogeneous Multi-Homed
Devices: A Survey,” Computer Networks, XCII (1), pp. 168-188, 2015.
[3] K. Chebrolu, R.R. Rao, “Bandwidth Aggregation for Real-Time Applications in Heterogeneous Networks,” IEEE
Transactions on Mobile Computing, V (4), pp. 388-403, 2006.
[4] K. Nisar, A. Amphawan, S. Hassan, N.I. Sarkar, “A Comprehensive Survey on Scheduler for VOIP over WLAN,”
Journal of Network and ComputerApplications, XXXVI (2), pp. 933-948, 2013.
[5] P. Wang, W. Zhuang, “A Token-Based Scheduling Scheme for WLANs and its Performance Analysis,” IEEE
International Conference on Communications, pp. 3716-3721, 2007.
[6] A. Floros, N. Kanellopoulos, “A Low Complexity IEEE802.11e Scheduling Scheme for Efficient Wireless
Delivery,” In 3rd International Symposium on Communications, Control and Signal Processing, ISCCSP 2008,
pp. 1-5, 2008.
[7] P. Ansel, Q. Ni, T. Turletti, “FHCF: A Simple and Efficient Scheduling Scheme for IEEE 802.11 e Wireless
LAN,” Mobile Networks and Applications, XI (3), pp. 391-403, 2006.
[8] M. Przybylski, B. Belter, A. Binczewski,“Shall We Worry About Packet Reordering,” Computational Methods in
Science and Technology, XI (2), pp. 141-146, 2005.
[9] S.Z. Ahmad, M.A. Qadir, M.S. Akbar, A. Bouras, “Analysis of Multi-Server Scheduling Paradigm for Service
Guarantees during Network Mobility,” Wireless Personal Communications, LXIII (1), pp. 177-197, 2012.
[10] S.P. Tinta, A.E. Mohr, J.L. Wong, “Characterizing end-to-end packet reordering with UDP traffic”, In IEEE
Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC), Sousse, pp. 321-324, 2009.
[11] C. Gao, Z. Ling, Y. Yuan, “Packet Reordering Analysis for Concurrent Multipath Transfer,” International
Journal of Communication Systems, XXVII (12), pp. 4510-4526, 2014.
[12] N.M. Piratla, A.P. Jayasumana, A.A. Bare, “Reorder Density (RD): A Formal, Comprehensive Metric for Packet
Reordering,” In International Conference on Research in Networking, Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, pp. 78-89,
2005.
[13] J. Feng, Z. Ouyang, L. Xu, B. Ramamurthy, “Packet Reordering in High-Speed Networks and its Impact on
High-Speed TCP Variants,” Computer Communications. XXXII (1), pp. 62-68, 2009.
[14] D. Kaspar, K. Evensen, A.F. Hansen, P. Engelstad, P. Halvorsen, “An Analysis of the Heterogeneity and IP
Packet Reordering Over Multiple Wireless Networks,” IEEE Symposium on Computer and Communications, pp.
637–642, 2009.
[15] A. Ford, C. Raiciu, M. Handley, S. Barre, J. Iyengar, “Architectural Guidelines for Multipath TCP
Development,” IETF, Informational RFC 6182, 2011.
[16] J.C.R. Bennett, C. Partridge, N. Shectman, “Packet Reordering is Not Pathological Network Behavior,”
Transactions on Networking IEEE/ACM, pp. 789-798, 1999.
[17] E. Blanton, M. Allman, “On Making TCP More Robust to Packet Reordering,” ACM SIGCOMM Computer
Communication Review, XXXII (1), pp. 20-30, 2002.
[18] L. Gharai, C. Perkins, T. Lehman, “Packet Reordering, High Speed Networks and Transport Protocol
Performance,” In Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks
(ICCCN 2004), Chicago, IL, pp 73-78, 2004.
[19] M.F. Tsai, N.K. Chilamkurti, S. Zeadally, C.K. Shieh, “A Concurrent Multi-path Transmission Control Scheme
to reduce packet reordering latency at the receiver,” In International Conference on Advanced Technologies for
Communications, ATC 2008, IEEE, pp. 437-440, 2008.
[20] J. Liao, J. Wang, T. Li, X. Zhu, “Introducing multipath selection for concurrent multipath transfer in the future
internet,” Computer Networks,LV (4), pp. 1024-1035, 2011.

[21] M.K. Alam, S.A. Latif, M.H. Masud, F. Anwar, “A Review on Scheduling Schemes of High Speed Wireless
Campus Network for Interactive Multimedia Transmission,” In IEEE Malaysia International Conference on
Communications (MICC), Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, pp. 462-467, 2013.
[22] A. Jayasumana, N. Piratla, T. Bank, A. Bare, R. Whitner, “Improved packet reordering metrics,” Request for
Comment 5236, 2008.
[23] S. Prabhavat, H. Nishiyama, N. Ansari, N. Kato, “Effective Delay-Controlled Load Distribution Over Multipath
Networks,” IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, XXII (10), pp. 1730-1741, 2011.
[24] S. Prabhavat, H. Nishiyama, N. Ansari, N. Kato, “On the Performance Analysis of Traffic Splitting on Load
Imbalancing and Packet Reordering of Bursty Traffic,” In IEEE International Conference on Network
Infrastructure and Digital Content, IC-NIDC 2009, pp. 236-240, 2009.
[25] “MPEG-4 and H.263 Video Traces for Network Performance Evaluation”, Www-tkn.ee.tu-berlin.de, 2006.
[Online]. Available: http://www-tkn.ee.tu-berlin.de/research/trace/trace.html. [Accessed: July 03, 2018].

Analysis of Packet Reordering Delay For Bandwidth Aggregation in Heterogeneous Wireless Networks

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Analysis of Packet Reordering Delay For Bandwidth Aggregation in Heterogeneous Wireless Networks

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

IPASJ International Journal of Information Technology (IIJIT)

Web Site: http://www.ipasj.org/IIJIT/IIJIT.htm

Analysis of Packet Reordering Delay for

Keywords:about four key words separated by commas

Figure 1General architecture of HWN

Volume 6, Issue 7, July 2018 Page 9

Figure 2Logical link in HWN

2.2 Packet reordering

Figure 3 Packet reordering in HWN

Volume 6, Issue 7, July 2018 Page 11

Figure 4 Reorder Displacement (RD) Calculation

Volume 6, Issue 7, July 2018 Page 12

RBD[0] = 6/8, RBD[1] = 2/8

Figure 5 Reorder Buffer-occupancy Density (RBD) Calculation

will be forwarded via path j.

3. PACKET SCHEDULING ALGORITHM

Volume 6, Issue 7, July 2018 Page 13

1. Queue (Q) of packets to the scheduler, active set A

Volume 6, Issue 7, July 2018 Page 14

Figure 6 Users Node assigning in HWN using NS3 tool.

Figure 7 Simulation Scenario on NS3

Volume 6, Issue 7, July 2018 Page 15

scenario has been shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8 Simulation Scenario on NS3

Figure 9 Delay Analysis on NS3

Volume 6, Issue 7, July 2018 Page 16

Figure 10 Packet Reordering Delay on Single Path

Figure 11 Packet Reordering entropy on Single Path

Volume 6, Issue 7, July 2018 Page 17

Figure 12 Packet Reordering Delay on Multiple Paths

Figure 13 Packet Reordering entropy on Multiple Path

Volume 6, Issue 7, July 2018 Page 18

Volume 6, Issue 7, July 2018 Page 19

Volume 6, Issue 7, July 2018 Page 20

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen