Scheduling Heterogeneous Wireless Systems for Efficient Spectrum Access
© L. Bao and S. Liao. 2010
Received: 22 August 2009
Accepted: 30 September 2009
Published: 19 November 2009
The spectrum scarcity problem emerged in recent years, due to unbalanced utilization of RF (radio frequency) bands in the current state of wireless spectrum allocations. Spectrum access scheduling addresses challenges arising from spectrum sharing by interleaving the channel access among multiple wireless systems in a TDMA fashion. Different from cognitive radio approaches which are opportunistic and noncollaborative in general, spectrum access scheduling proactively structures and interleaves the channel access pattern of heterogeneous wireless systems, using collaborative designs by implementing a crucial architectural component—the base stations on software defined radios (SDRs). We discuss our system design choices for spectrum sharing from multiple perspectives and then present the mechanisms for spectrum sharing and coexistence of GPRS+WiMAX and GPRS+WiFi as use cases, respectively. Simulations were carried out to prove that spectrum access scheduling is an alternative, feasible, and promising approach to the spectrum scarcity problem.
According to a recent spectrum usage investigation conducted by the FCC , the RF wireless spectrum is far from fully utilized. According to the report, typical channel occupancy was less than 15%, and the peak usage was only close to 85%. On the other hand, traffic demands on the wireless networks are growing exponentially over the years and quickly overwhelm the network capacity of wireless service providers in some parts of the regions, such as hotspots or disaster-stricken areas where limited number of base stations remain. Adaptive and efficient spectrum reuse mechanisms are highly desirable in order to fully utilize the wireless bands.
Femtocells and cognitive radios are two of the widely adopted solutions to improve spectrum utilization. However, we take a different approach from femtocells that stayed within the same wireless network system architecture except for adjusting the power footage of base stations or cognitive radios which opportunistically share the RF spectrum that was originally allocated to the primary spectrum users.
In this paper, we propose a spectrum access scheduling approach to heterogeneous wireless systems coexistence, in which all wireless systems are considered as first-class citizens of the spectrum domain, and they intentionally allow each other chances for channel access in a TDMA fashion, thus improving the spectrum utilization efficiency.
Prior research studied the Bluetooth and WiFi coexistence issues . However, very little research has been done that enables the coexistence of heterogeneous wireless systems in a systematic manner. Spectrum access scheduling is designed from a system engineering point of view, such that individual wireless systems are aware of the existence of other wireless carriers in the same RF band, and time-share the bandwidth.
Because wireless channel access protocols can be categorized in either randomized or scheduled approaches , we study the mechanisms that enable the coexistence of heterogeneous wireless systems of these two categories in this paper, namely, the TDMA and CSMA systems. Specifically, we examine spectrum access scheduling problem in the ISM bands through three popular standards—GPRS, WiMAX, and WiFi—and use the coexistence settings of GPRS+WiFi and GPRS+WiMAX, respectively, as exemplary heterogeneous systems to study the spectrum sharing operations of these systems in the TDMA fashion. Both of the heterogeneous wireless systems coexistence solutions are based on the SDR (software defined radio) platforms.
Different from other channel access research on the TDMA scheme, our spectrum access scheduling achieves spectrum sharing of the same RF bands among wireless users that operates different wireless systems, instead of supporting homogeneous wireless stations in the same RF bands. Therefore, spectrum access scheduling brings up new opportunities as to how to utilize commercial and free ISM spectrum bands, poses new challenges about the desired mechanisms for protocol coexistence, and leads to further questions about the changes needed on hardware platforms.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 presents detailed discussions about two other spectrum reuse solutions, namely, the femtocell and cognitive radio approaches. Section 3 presents the architectural choices for spectrum reuse and our approach to the problem. We describe the system components and solutions in Section 4. In Section 5, we elaborate on the channel access control mechanisms for two heterogeneous wireless systems coexistence scenarios for spectrum reuse in the ISM bands, namely, GPRS+WiFi and GPRS+WiMAX, respectively, and evaluate their performance. Section 6 concludes the paper.
2. Related Work
Studies on wireless usage show that more than 50% of voice calls and more than 70% of data traffic originates indoors . However, many cellular users experience little or no service in indoor areas, resulting in failed or interrupted wireless communication or wireless communication of less than desirable quality. Therefore, the "femtocell" technology fills in the gap by installing short-range, low-cost and low-power base stations for better signal coverage, especially in indoor environments . The small base stations communicate with the cellular network over a broadband connection such as DSL, cable modem or a separate RF backhaul channel.
The value propositions of femtocells are the low upfront cost to the service provider, increased system capacity due to smaller cell footprint at reduced interference, and the prolonged handset battery life with lower transmission power. When the traffic originating indoors can be absorbed into the femtocell networks over the IP backbone, cellular operators can provide traffic load balancing from the traditional heavily congested macrocells towards femtocells, providing better reception for mobile users.
The 3rd Generation Partnership Project (3GPP) published the world's first femtocell standard in 2009, covering aspects of femtocell network architecture, radio interference, femtocell management, provisioning and security. Several cellular operators provide femtocells, for instances, Sprint's Airave femtocell  in the US, Verizon's Wireless Network Extender using CDMA in the US . More adaptive reconfigurable femtocells allow to execute multiple wireless systems on them [8–10].
Femtocells only improve the spectrum reuse efficiency by reducing the cost and power of cellular base stations, and do not modify the spectrum sharing schemes for multiple wireless systems to access the same RF bands. Hence, there is still room to improve RF channel utilization efficiency for femtocells.
2.2. Cognitive Radio
In recent years, cognitive radio has been extensively studied in order to address the spectrum reuse issue [11–13], which was first introduced by Mitola [14–17]. In the cognitive radio approach, wireless users are categorized into two groups of radio spectrum users—ones that have the legitimate primary right of access, called "primary users," and others that do not, called "cognitive users." Whereas the primary spectrum users access the RF channels in their normal ways, secondary users use their spectrum cognitive and agile capabilities to discover and use the under-utilized RF bands, originally allocated to the primary users, therefore achieving spectrum reuse for efficiency purposes.
Dynamic spectrum access techniques using cognitive radios face several challenges to offer spectrum sensing, learning, decision and monitoring capabilities, as well as the cognitive channel access mechanisms to avoid channel access conflicts between themselves and with the primary spectrum users. By monitoring and learning about the current radio spectrum utilization patterns, the decision logic in cognitive radios can take advantage of the vacant "spectrum holes"  in different locations and during time periods and opportunistically tune their transceivers into these spectrum holes to communicate with each other . Therefore, the channel access mechanisms are opportunistic in nature, and pose significant system requirements to the cognitive radios due to their radio spectrum agility.
Several network architectures based on cognitive radios have been proposed . The spectrum pooling architecture is based on orthogonal frequency division multiplexing (OFDM) [20, 21]. The Cognitive Radio approach for usage of the Virtual Unlicensed Spectrum (CORVUS) system exploits unoccupied licensed bands in a coordinated manner by local spectrum sensing, primary user detection, and spectrum allocation to share the radio bandwidth [22, 23]. IEEE 802.22 is a new working group of the IEEE 802 LAN/MAN standards committee which aims at constructing a Wireless Regional Area Network (WRAN) utilizing white spaces (channels that are not already used) in the allocated TV frequency spectrum .
In order to coordinate between cognitive radios, a control channel, called rendezvous, is mandatory to exchange channel quality and utilization information . Because the spectrum holes are dynamically changing, the assigning of a rendezvous channel is a challenging issue [25, 26]. In [23, 27, 28], the rendezvous was achieved by dedicating a certain radio band, whereas in , a DOSS (Dynamic Open Spectrum Sharing) was proposed using triband spectrum allocation, namely, the control band, the data band, and the busy-tone band. In , a common Coordinated Access Band (CAB) is proposed to regulate authorities such as the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in order to utilize CAB to coordinate spectrum access. In , a similar channel called the Common Spectrum Coordination Channel (CSCC) is proposed for sharing unlicensed spectrum (e.g., 2.4 GHz ISM and 5 GHz U-NII). Spectrum users have to periodically broadcast spectrum usage information and service parameters to the CSCC, so that neighboring users can mutually observe via a common protocol. In addition, the duration of the spectrum availability is also essential in order to avoid conflicts with the primary users. The authors of  apply statistical analysis of spectrum utilization.
3. System Architecture
3.1. Architectural Design Choice
Design perspectives to achieve coexistence of heterogeneous systems.
Point of view
Change parts of the wireless systems for coexistence, such as modifying base-stations or mobile handsets alone to enable spectrum agility.
Design the whole system to be spectrum agile.
Leverage existing protocol mechanisms, such as protocol messages, conditions or signals to coordinate channel access schedules.
Build-in interoperability mechanisms at the beginning of the protocol design phase, so that the new wireless system lives with other systems in constant dialog and harmony.
Share at microscale, which requires protocols to multiplex the spectrum resource at fine-grained millisecond levels, close to the hardware clock speed.
Share at macroscale, which requires to set up advance timetable at hour or day level for different wireless system to operate without running into each other's ways.
Monopoly, which allows a wireless system to occupy the spectrum completely for the protocol operations.
Commonwealth, which allows multiple systems to fragment the channel in frequency domain.
Architectural choices: we can either change parts of the existing wireless systems or the whole system to be spectrum agile. In this paper, the spectrum access scheduling approach changes the base stations in order to allow the coexistence of heterogeneous systems on the same spectrum bands. In addition, we add a spectrum up/down converter on the mobile stations in order to shift the radio carriers from the mobile stations' native operating bands to other bands.
Protocol design: we can allow the coexistence of heterogeneous wireless systems either by leveraging their protocol features so that they accommodate each other or by considering the coexistence issues at the beginning of the protocol designs. Apparently, the former approach allows backward compatibility, and we adopt this approach in this paper.
Temporal arrangement: the time scale at which heterogeneous wireless systems share the spectrum can either be large in terms of hours at the communication session duration level or be small in terms of milliseconds at the packet transmission level. It is more difficult to allow system coexistence at the millisecond level, and we study spectrum access scheduling mechanisms at this level.
Spectral multiplexing: the spectrum bands available for heterogeneous wireless systems can either be shared by one system at a time or be shared by several systems at a time using finer granularity of spectrum separations. For simplicity, we study the spectrum multiplexing scheme using the former approach.
These perspectives can be applied in cognitive radio system designs. We can see that a popular cognitive radio system design tends to have all units to be spectrum agile, and operate at macrotime scales (minutes or hours), whereas femtocells exploit the spectral multiplexing approach by deploying femtocells at remote or indoor environments which the main wireless infrastructure cannot reach.
3.2. High-Level System Description
According to Table 1, the spectrum access scheduling approach modifies the base-stations, and operates at microtime scales. Specifically, the base station supports and executes heterogeneous wireless systems simultaneously, and alternates their channel access in fine-tuned temporal granularity so that the mobile stations of all heterogeneous wireless systems may communicate with the base station. In order to achieve the versatility of system support, we adopt the SDR platform as our implementation hardware.
The other way of spectrum reuse is to shift the operational RF bands of the WiFi units to the GPRS operational bands, so that WiFi systems may get data service from GSM networks in the GPRS commercial bands.
As we can see, the use case mostly affects the base station of the overall system architecture, and utilizes only one common spectrum band for operations in a microtime scale. Note that although Vanu nodes also use SDR platform and support multiple concurrently active wireless standards , they do not modify the characteristics of the wireless systems nor have any interactions between the heterogeneous wireless systems .
Our approach is also different from cognitive radio approaches in that the wireless protocols are aware of each other at the base station and share the spectrum bands with minimum disruptions in spectrum access scheduling, whereas the cognitive radio approach involves constant monitoring and opportunistic accesses. On the other hand, spectrum access scheduling is complementary to cognitive radio in that cognitive radio helps find out the available spectrum bands to operate on, and spectrum accesses scheduling accesses the channels in a coordinated fashion.
The use case in Figure 2 could be more complicated if more users join and leave the system or different wireless communication systems are also able to join the system, in which cases spectrum access scheduling would have to address issues related with quality of service provisioning, SDR hardware reconfiguration and so forth.
4. Spectrum Access Scheduling Components
4.1. Implementation Platform
Due to the programmability, the SDR platform is chosen to implement our spectrum access scheduling scheme. Joseph Mitola invented the term Software Defined Radio (SDR)  in 1999. A wide variety of modulation strategies, access strategies and protocols are implemented in software on SDRs [15, 17].
Several software architectures have been proposed so far, such as Software Communication Architecture(SCA) , and the corresponding open-source implementations . They can be adapted in multiple protocol concurrent execution scenarios. However, the reconfigurable hardware platforms, mostly based on FPGA architectures, were not designed for concurrent execution of multiple wireless systems, and need a considerable amount of research for efficient placements on the FPGA. In addition, when the SDR software and hardware modules are reconfigured according to the protocol operations specified in our spectrum access scheduling approaches, there are extra hardware/software codesign and dynamic coordination issues. However, we do not address these issues in this paper, but only focus on the MAC layer issues.
4.2. Channel Frequency Alignments
In our spectrum access scheduling approach, we address the problems in sharing the ISM bands between the discussed heterogeneous wireless systems. Such a choice presents both convenience and feasibility reasons. ISM bands are free and do not require RF license granted by the FCC, and many IEEE standards operate over the ISM bands. Plus, offering wireless services to cheap wireless handset also presents experimental and lucrative opportunities to the system developers.
In order to operate on the 2.4 GHz ISM band to communicate with the SDR-based base stations as shown in Figure 3, the GPRS handsets require a frequency converter to shift the operational channels onto the ISM band .
The signal transmitting process is similar to the receiving process in the reverse direction.
Essentially, the formula of the converter in Figure 4 is
in which is the channel frequency that goes into and from the antenna, is the operating frequency of the GPRS device, and is the add-on frequency generated by the local oscillators.
The local oscillators would know which frequency that the GPRS mobile station is going to transmit or to receive signals. There are two mechanisms to acquire such knowledge—one is to fix on the channel frequency manually, and the other is to allow the frequency converter dynamically to choose the channel frequency depending on the spectrum availability. The second approach is what the cognitive radio research focused on and is where spectrum access scheduling can take advantage of the results and mechanisms of cognitive radio. In this paper, we limit our discussions to the first approach in which the channel frequencies are located in the ISM bands.
However, WiFi 2.4 GHz operating band is about 80 MHz with three noneoverlapping WiFi channels in the US, while the total operating frequency band of GPRS is around 70 MHz, including the 45 MHz downlink/uplink (DL/UL) separation and the DL/UL bandwidth 25 MHz each. Therefore, if GPRS operating channels are plainly converted into the 2.4 GHz ISM bands, GPRS will impact every nonoverlapping WiFi channel, which is inefficient and difficult to coordinate.
We solve this problem by modifying the add-on frequency of the local oscillator in the frequency up/down converter, as given in Figure 4. That is, we fit the GPRS DL/UL bands into the 20 MHz WiFi/WiMAX channels by shifting different frequency offsets, respectively, and offering narrower DL/UL bandwidths. This way, both GPRS DL/UL bands can be mapped to different portions of a WiFi channel.
Certainly, utilizing just one of the WiFi channels is easier to manage than more WiFi channels because the base station only has to coordinate wireless stations operating in one channel, and the implementation is the same as shown in Figure 4. However, if the base station's operating channel is not fixed to a certain WiFi channel, the mobile station would have to control the local oscillators in the up/down converter to shift GPRS signals to and from the proper WiFi channels. As shown in Figure 4, an interface in the GPRS device is provided to connect and control the local oscillators.
4.3. Cellular Architecture
In order to avoid intercell interferences, the base station of each cell needs to apply power control mechanisms to both GPRS stations and WiFi/WiMAX stations. Because we have arranged the ISM band operators, WiFi and WiMAX, as the hosting wireless systems, GPRS, which is a Wireless Wide Area Network (WWAN) technology, will apply the power control mechanisms to obey the FCC regulations for using the ISM band. This further helps optimize the talk time and standby time of the GPRS handsets.
5. Channel Access Control and Evaluations
The essential mechanisms to coordinate distributed channel access control follow two channel access schemes; ( ) random channel access scheme, such as CSMA, CSMA/CA, and pure and slotted ALOHA, which were most extensively used and studied, for example, MACA, MACAW , IEEE 802.11 DCF , PAMAS ; and ( ) scheduled channel access scheme, such as FDMA, TDMA, CDMA mechanisms in wireless cellular networks, GSM, UMTS and CDMA2000 systems .
WiFi standard IEEE 802.11  has adopted the randomized channel access scheme using the CSMA/CA mechanisms. The other two wireless systems, GPRS and WiMAX, are based on the scheduled channel access control scheme using the TDMA scheme.
The difficulty of achieving the coexistence of any two wireless systems lies in the fact that we can only modify limited number architectural components, such as the base stations in our spectrum access scheduling approach. Therefore, without proper control over the protocol operations, the unmodified system components of one wireless system may unexpectedly interrupt the ongoing packet reception in another wireless system, causing collisions. Such possible scenario happens especially when one of the coexisting wireless system operates using the random access scheme.
Therefore, we discuss two coexistence scenarios, namely, GPRS+WiFi and GPRS+WiMAX, respectively, for spectrum access scheduling purposes in the TDMA fashion. The GPRS+WiFi scenario integrates the scheduled and random access schemes, whereas the GPRS+WiMAX scenario involves different wireless systems under only the scheduled channel access scheme. Specifically, we present the necessary changes to the protocol messaging at the base stations in order to prevent the unmodified wireless stations from stepping into each other for channel access.
In this section, we first briefly provide a tutorial about the channel access control mechanisms in WiFi, GPRS and WiMAX, then specify the protocol control mechanisms to enable the coexistence of heterogeneous wireless systems.
5.1. Background Review
5.1.1. IEEE 802.11b (WiFi)
The channel access method in IEEE 802.11 Distributed Coordination Function (DCF) is based on Carrier Sensing Multiple Access (CSMA) for sharing a common channel . It is essentially a time-division multiplexing method, only that the time slots are virtual and flexible to the transmission time of each data frame.
carrier sensing (CS) before each transmission,
collision avoidance using RTS/CTS control messages,
interframe spacings (IFSs) to prioritize different types of messages,
binary exponential backoff (BEB) mechanism to randomize among multiple channel access attempts,
network Allocation Vector (NAV) for channel reservation purposes.
The NAV-based channel reservation mechanism will be utilized in spectrum access scheduling for allocating time periods for heterogeneous wireless system operations.
5.1.2. GPRS (General Packet Radio Service)
GPRS is an enhancement over the existing GSM systems by using the same air interface and channel access control procedure. Specifically, we discuss the GPRS systems based on the GSM-900 bands. In GSM-900, the downlink (DL) and uplink (UL) frequency bands are 25 MHz wide each and each band is divided into 200 KHz channels. The frequency separation between the corresponding downlink and uplink channels is 45 MHz.
The GPRS downlink and uplink channels are centrally controlled and managed by the base stations (BSs). GPRS uses the same physical channels as in GSM, but organizes them differently from GSM. In GPRS, the Data Link Layer (DLL) data-frame is mapped to a radio block, which is defined as an information block transmitted over a physical channel of four consecutive frames .
A single purpose. For example, "TN0" marked with "PB" are used as the PBCCH (Packet Broadcast Control CHannel) logical channel to beacon the GPRS packet system information at the position of block 0 of a 52-frame multi-frame.
Multiple purposes. For example, "TN1" marked with "PD/PA/PC" is used as PDTCH (Packet Data Traffic CHannel) to transfer data traffic or as PACCH (Packet Associated Control CHannel) to be associated with a GPRS traffic channel to allocate bandwidth or as PCCCH (Packet Common Control CHannel) for request/reply messages to access the GPRS services. The PCCCH includes three subchannels, Packet Random Access CHannel (PRACH), Packet Access Grant CHannel (PAGCH), and Packet Paging Channel (PPCH) .
GPRS stations use the PRACH to initiate a packet transfer by sending their requests for access to the GPRS network service, and listen to the PAGCH for a packet uplink assignment. The uplink assignment message includes the list of PDCH (Packet Data CHannels) and the corresponding Uplink Status Flag (USF) values per PDCH. GPRS stations keep listening to the USFs of the allocated PDCHs. If the corresponding USF is set, it means that the GPRS station has now been granted access to the next PDCH block.
Not all the GPRS stations have the capability to simultaneously transmit and receive. Half-duplex mobile stations can communicate in only one direction at a time. In a full-duplex system, stations allow communication in both directions simultaneously.
5.1.3. IEEE 802.16-2004 (WiMAX)
In this paper, we focus on the following IEEE 802.16-2004 (fixed WiMAX) system for spectrum access scheduling: (a) a single cell operating in the Point-to-MultiPoint (PMP) mode, (b) no mobility, (c) use of 2.4 GHz unlicensed bands, and (d) use of Time Division Duplex (TDD) as the channel duplexing scheme.
5.2. Coexistence of GPRS and WiMAX
In the time domain, GPRS and WiMAX based on WiMAX share the frequency bands in a round robin fashion, and the granularity of the channels is the GSM time frame, which is at the level of milliseconds. To avoid confusions, we use WiMAX to specifically mean IEEE 802.16-2004 in the following discussions if not indicated otherwise.
As we know, the duration of a GPRS frame is 4.615 milliseconds. Although the default frame durations in IEEE 802.16-2004 does not include 4.615 milliseconds, WiMAX frame does have different frame durations to be chosen and have adjustable periods for time frame alignments, such as the RTG and the TTG.
In addition, the portions allocated to WiMAX and GPRS can be flexible. We discuss only the fixed allocations to each of the wireless systems for simplicity, and leave traffic-dependent dynamic allocation scheme as future research.
Note that in GPRS networks, the uplink and downlink time slot numbers are separated by three time slots, as shown in Figure 13. Hence, if we use the first three downlink time slots in the GPRS period in Figure 12, the uplink time slots can only be "TN5-7". Although not having the "TN0" in uplink seemed like a problem, such a scheme actually works as shown by the shaded time slots. In such arrangements, the downlink GPRS block and the uplink GPRS block are separated by five time slots, long enough for a half-duplex GPRS to get ready to receive and transmit sequentially.
5.2.2. Performance Evaluations
We use the network simulator NCTUns 4.0  to simulate the coexistence of the two wireless systems GPRS and WiMAX. The NCTUns simulator provides the implementations of GPRS and WiMAX with enough details in the physical and data link layers to allow us to realize spectrum access scheduling mechanisms. Specifically, we modify the base station modules in order to control the channel access mechanisms, and enable the coexistence of heterogeneous systems in the same spectrum bands. One simple static scenario is simulated in which a single base station supports one stationary GPRS handset and one WiMAX stationary subscriber hosts.
We use CBR traffic in various data rates to evaluate the throughput, delay and packet loss characteristics of the traffic for GPRS and WiMAX systems, respectively. Two CBR connections are simulated in each traffic load configuration, namely, the connections starts from the WiMAX Subscriber Station to the fixed Host 2, and from the GPRS Station to the fixed Host 1, respectively.
The GPRS CBR data packet has a payload size of 100 bytes, and the WiMAX CBR data packet payload is of size 1000 bytes. The effective network loads are from 1 to 15 Kbps for the GPRS system, and from 1 to 15 Mbps for the WiMAX system. The raw data rate of the WiMAX system is 54 Mbps.
5.3. Coexistence of GPRS and WiFi
WiFi systems based on IEEE 802.11 DCF are totally different from WiMAX channel access schemes in that channel access is randomized, and network services are provided on the best-effort basis.
Different from achieving the coexistence of GPRS and WiMAX systems, we adapt the RTS control frames to allocation channel time periods for GPRS operations, as used by the Bluetooth and WiFi coexistence proposal .
The duration of NAV is set such that the reserved period can cover 3 GPRS time slot period, and that the end of the NAV channel reservation is the beginning of the next WiFi channel access.
Similar to the coexistence arrangement of GPRS and WiMAX channel access, the portions allocated to WiMAX and GPRS can be flexible. We discuss only the fixed allocations to each of the wireless systems for simplicity, and leave traffic-dependent dynamic allocation scheme as future work.
The timing of special channel-reservation RTS transmissions is calculated and controlled by the base station. When the channel data rate and the regular duration of a data frame transmission is known beforehand, the base station can estimate the possibility of the channel being occupied by the mobile stations or the base station itself when the GPRS due time arrives. If the channel will be potentially occupied by stations in the cell, the base station will preempt the channel with the RTS-to-itself control message so as to prevent WiFi packet transmission extending into the GPRS periods. The time before GPRS periods when WiFi stations should stop access the channel is called "danger zone". Once the time advances into the "danger zone", the base station shall grab the channel in the first moment when the channel becomes idle by sending the special RTS control message.
If the "danger zone" is long enough, the base station could choose to send multiple RTS messages to ensure the channel reservation message RTS is received by all the mobile stations in the cell, as shown by the second GPRS time frame period in Figure 16.
When the base station enters the GPRS operational period, it carries out the GPRS data communication functionalities. Once the NAV expires, mobile stations and the base station can enter the IEEE 802.11 DCF mode to contend for channel accesses.
5.3.2. Performance Evaluations
We again use the NCTUns simulator for evaluating the performance of GPRS+WiFi coexistence systems. In the simulations, we use the same topology, packet sizes and network loads as GPRS+WiMAX simulations in Figure 14, except that the WiMAX Subscriber Station is changed to a WiFi station.
We have presented a new spectrum sharing scheme, called spectrum access scheduling, to improve the spectrum efficiency in the temporal domain by allowing heterogeneous wireless networks to time-share the spectrum. Different from cognitive radio approaches, which are opportunistic and noncollaborative in general, spectrum access scheduling treats the collection of select wireless systems as equal spectrum share holders, and optimizes the system performance by collaborative designs. We have looked at the spectrum access scheduling design challenges from different perspectives, and proposed a time shared channel access paradigm by modifying the wireless base stations using the SDR platform. Two heterogeneous wireless systems coexistence scenarios, GPRS+WiMAX and GPRS+WiFi, have been studied and simulated. The performance results of the simulations show that spectrum access scheduling is a feasible solution to the spectrum sharing problem, and is worthy of further research.
This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under Grant no. 0725914.
- FCC : Spectrum Policy Task Force Report, ET Docket No. 02-155. November 2002
- Chiasserini CF, Rao RR: Coexistence mechanisms for interference mitigation between IEEE 802.11 WLANs and Bluetooth. Proceedings of the 21st Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (INFOCOM '02), June 2002, New York, NY, USA 2: 590-598.Google Scholar
- Kurose J, Ross K: Computer Networking: A Top-Down Approach Featuring the Internet. Addison Wesley, New York, NY, USA; 2005.Google Scholar
- Chandrasekhar V, Andrews JG, Gatherer A: Femtocell networks: a survey. IEEE Communications Magazine 2008, 46(9):59-67.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Yeh S-P, Talwar S, Lee S-C, Kim H: WiMAX femtocells: a perspective on network architecture, capacity, and coverage. IEEE Communications Magazine 2008, 46(10):58-65.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Sprint Inc http://www.nextel.com/en/services/airave/index.shtml?id9=vanity:airave
- Verizon Inc http://www22.verizon.com
- Femtocell October 2007, http://www.femtoforum.org/femto/Files/File/Airvana%20Femtocell%20White%20Paper%20Oct%202007.pdf
- Ericsson's Femto Cell Solution http://www.ericsson.com
- Vanu Inc http://www.vanu.com
- Harada H: A study on a new wireless communications system based on cognitive radio technology. IEICE, Tokyo, Japan; 2005.Google Scholar
- Akyildiz IF, Lee W-Y, Vuran MC, Mohanty S: A survey on spectrum management in cognitive radio networks. IEEE Communications Magazine 2008, 46(4):40-48.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Akyildiz IF, Lee W-Y, Vuran MC, Mohanty S: Next generation/dynamic spectrum access/cognitive radio wireless networks: a survey. Computer Networks 2006, 50(13):2127-2159. 10.1016/j.comnet.2006.05.001View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Mitola J III: Cognitive radio for flexible mobile multimedia communications. IEEE International Workshop on In Mobile Multimedia Communications (MOMUC '99), 1999 3-10.Google Scholar
- Mitola J III: Software Radios: Wireless Architecture for the 21st Century. John Wiley & Sons, New York, NY, USA; 1999.Google Scholar
- Mitola J III: Cognitive radio: an integrated agent architecture for software defined radio, Ph.D. thesis. Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden; 2000.Google Scholar
- Mitola J III, Maguire GQ Jr.: Cognitive radio: making software radios more personal. IEEE Personal Communications 1999, 6(4):13-18. 10.1109/98.788210View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Kolodzy P, et al.: Next generation communications: Kickoff meeting. Proceedings of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA '01), October 2001Google Scholar
- Sahai A, Hoven N, Tandra R: Some fundamental limits on cognitive radio. Proceedings of Allerton Conference, October 2004, Monticello, Minn, USAGoogle Scholar
- Weiss TA, Jondral FK: Spectrum pooling: an innovative strategy for the enhancement of spectrum efficiency. IEEE Communications Magazine 2004, 42(3):S8-S14.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Weiss TA, Hillenbrand J, Krohn A, Jondral FK: Efficient signaling of spectral resources in spectrum pooling systems. Proceedings of the 10th Symposium on Communications and Vehicular Technology (SCVT '03), Novenber 2003, BeneluxGoogle Scholar
- Brodersen RW, Wolisz A, Cabric D, Mishra SM, Willkomm D: Corvus: a cognitive radio approach for usage of virtual unlicensed spectrum. Berkeley Wireless Research Center (BWRC), Berkeley, Clif, USA; 2004.Google Scholar
- Cabric D, Mishra SM, Willkomm D, Brodersen R, Wolisz A: A cognitive radio approach for usage of virtual unlicensed spectrum. Proceeding of the 14th IST Mobile and Wireless Communications Summit, June 2005, Dresden, GermanyGoogle Scholar
- IEEE Working Group on Wireless Regional Area Networks (WRANs) : IEEE 802 LAN/MAN standards committee 802.22 WG on WRANs. IEEE, New York, NY, USA; April 2008.http://www.ieee802.org/22Google Scholar
- Jeong PJ, Yoo M: Resource-aware rendezvous algorithm for cognitive radio networks. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Advanced Communication Technology (ICACT '07), February 2007, Gangwon-do, South Korea 3: 1673-1678.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- FCC. ET Docket No. 03-108 : Facilitating Opportunities for Flexible and Efficient and Reliable Spectrum Use Employing Cognitive Radio Technologies. March 2005
- Holland O, Attar A, Olaziregi N, Sattari N, Aghvami AH: A universal resource awareness channel for cognitive radio. Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC '06), September 2006, Helsinki, Finland 1-5.Google Scholar
- Krishnamurthy S, Thoppian M, Venkatesan S, Prakash R: Control channel based MAC-layer configuration, routing and situation awareness for cognitive radio networks. Proceedings of IEEE Military Communications Conference (MILCOM '05), October 2005, Atlantic City, NJ, USA 1: 455-460.Google Scholar
- Ma L, Han X, Shen C-C: Dynamic open spectrum sharing MAC protocol for wireless ad hoc networks. Proceedings of the 1st IEEE International Symposium on New Frontiers in Dynamic Spectrum Access Networks (DySPAN '05), November 2005, Baltimore, Md, USA 203-213.Google Scholar
- Buddhikot MM, Kolody P, Miller S, Ryan K, Evans J: DIMSUMNet: new directions in wireless networking using coordinated dynamic spectrum access. Proceedings of the 6th IEEE International Symposium on a World of Wireless Mobile and Multimedia Networks (WoWMoM '05), June 2005, Taormina, Italy 78-85.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Raychaudhuri D, Jing X: A spectrum etiquette protocol for efficient coordination of radio devices in unlicensed bands. Proceedings of the 14th IEEE Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC '03), September 2003, Beijing, China 1: 172-176.Google Scholar
- Hsu AC-C, Wei DSL, Kuo C-CJ: A cognitive MAC protocol using statistical channel allocation for wireless ad-hoc networks. Proceedings of IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference (WCNC '07), March 2007, Kowloon, Hong Kong 105-110.Google Scholar
- Jondral FK: Software-defined radio—basics and evolution to cognitive radio. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking 2005, 2005(3):275-283.View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Mitola J III: Software radio architecture: a mathematical perspective. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications 1999, 17(4):514-538. 10.1109/49.761033View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- JTRS http://sca.jpeojtrs.mil/
- CRC SCARI-OPEN http://www.crc.ca
- Haykin S: Communication Systems. 4th edition. John Wiely & Sons, New York, NY, USA; 2001.Google Scholar
- Bharghavan V, Demers A, Shenker S, Zhang L: MACAW: a media access protocol for wireless LANs. Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Communications Architectures, Protocols and Applications (SIGCOMM '94), August 1994, London, UK 212-225.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- IEEE Std 802.11 : Wireless lAN medium access control (MAC) and physical layer (PHY) specifications. IEEE, New York, NY, USA; July 1997.Google Scholar
- Singh S, Raghavendra CS: PAMAS: power aware multi-access protocol with signalling for ad hoc networks. Computer Communication Review 1998, 28(3):5-25. 10.1145/293927.293928View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- Schiller J: Mobile Communication. 2nd edition. Addison Wesley, New York, NY, USA; 2003.Google Scholar
- IEEE Std 802.11 : Part 11: wireless lAN medium access control (MAC) and physical layer (PHY) specifications. IEEE, New York, NY, USA; 2007.Google Scholar
- McGuiggan P: GPRS in Practice: A Companion to the Specification. John Willey & Sons, New York, NY, USA; 2004.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
- IEEE Std 802.16-2004 : IEEE standard for local and metropolitan area networks—part 16: air interface for Fixed Broadband Wireless Access Systems. IEEE, New York, NY, USA; October 2004.Google Scholar
- NCTUns 4.0 Network Simulator and Emulator http://nsl.csie.nctu.edu.tw/nctuns.html
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.