draft-ietf-rmcat-wireless-tests-00.txt   draft-ietf-rmcat-wireless-tests-01.txt 
Network Working Group Z. Sarker Network Working Group Z. Sarker
Internet-Draft I. Johansson Internet-Draft I. Johansson
Intended status: Informational Ericsson AB Intended status: Informational Ericsson AB
Expires: December 13, 2015 June 11, 2015 Expires: May 8, 2016 X. Zhu
J. Fu
W. Tan
M. Ramalho
Cisco Systems
November 5, 2015
Evaluation Test Cases for Interactive Real-Time Media over Wireless Evaluation Test Cases for Interactive Real-Time Media over Wireless
Networks Networks
draft-ietf-rmcat-wireless-tests-00 draft-ietf-rmcat-wireless-tests-01
Abstract Abstract
It is evident that to ensure seamless and robust user experience It is evident that to ensure seamless and robust user experience
across all type of access networks multimedia communication suits across all type of access networks multimedia communication suits
should adapt to the changing network conditions. There is an ongoing should adapt to the changing network conditions. There is an ongoing
effort in IETF RMCAT working group to standardize rate adaptive effort in IETF RMCAT working group to standardize rate adaptive
algorithm(s) to be used in the real-time interactive communication. algorithm(s) to be used in the real-time interactive communication.
In this document test cases are described to evaluate the In this document test cases are described to evaluate the
performances of the proposed endpoint adaptation solutions in LTE performances of the proposed endpoint adaptation solutions in LTE
networks and Wi-Fi networks. It is aimed that the proposed solutions networks and Wi-Fi networks. The proposed algorithms should be
should be evaluated using the test cases defined in this document to evaluated using the test cases defined in this document to select
select most optimal solutions. most optimal solutions.
Status of This Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on December 13, 2015. This Internet-Draft will expire on May 8, 2016.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2015 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License. described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Terminologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. Terminologies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. Cellular Network Specific Test Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Cellular Network Specific Test Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Varying Network Load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 3.1. Varying Network Load . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.1.1. Network Connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.1.1. Network Connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.1.2. Simulation Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3.1.2. Simulation Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.2. Bad Radio Coverage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.2. Bad Radio Coverage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.2.1. Network connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.2.1. Network connection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.2.2. Simulation Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 3.2.2. Simulation Setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
3.3. Desired Evaluation Metrics for cellular test cases . . . 9 3.3. Desired Evaluation Metrics for cellular test cases . . . 10
4. Wi-Fi Networks Specific Test Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 4. Wi-Fi Networks Specific Test Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
5. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.1. Bottleneck in Wired Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.1.1. Network topology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.1.2. Test setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.1.3. Typical test scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.1.4. Expected behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 4.2. Bottleneck in Wi-Fi Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.2.1. Network topology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 4.2.2. Test setup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
4.2.3. Typical test scenarios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
4.2.4. Expected behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.3. Potential Potential Test Cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.3.1. EDCA/WMM usage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
4.3.2. Legacy 802.11b Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
5. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
6. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
8. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
Wireless networks (both cellular and Wi-Fi [IEEE802.11] local area Wireless networks (both cellular and Wi-Fi [IEEE802.11] local area
network) are an integral part of the Internet. Mobile devices network) are an integral part of the Internet. Mobile devices
connected to the wireless networks produces huge amount of media connected to the wireless networks produces huge amount of media
traffic in the Internet. They covers the scenarios of having a video traffic in the Internet. They covers the scenarios of having a video
call in the bus to media consumption sitting on a couch in a living call in the bus to media consumption sitting on a couch in a living
room. It is a well known fact that the characteristic and challenges room. It is a well known fact that the characteristic and challenges
for offering service over wireless network are very different than for offering service over wireless network are very different than
skipping to change at page 3, line 12 skipping to change at page 3, line 33
mobility in a cellular network is different than the user mobility in mobility in a cellular network is different than the user mobility in
a Wi-Fi network. Thus, It is important to evaluate the performance a Wi-Fi network. Thus, It is important to evaluate the performance
of the proposed RMCAT candidates separately in the cellular mobile of the proposed RMCAT candidates separately in the cellular mobile
networks and Wi-Fi local networks (IEEE 802.11xx protocol family ). networks and Wi-Fi local networks (IEEE 802.11xx protocol family ).
RMCAT evaluation criteria [I-D.ietf-rmcat-eval-criteria] document RMCAT evaluation criteria [I-D.ietf-rmcat-eval-criteria] document
provides the guideline to perform the evaluation on candidate provides the guideline to perform the evaluation on candidate
algorithms and recognizes wireless networks to be important access algorithms and recognizes wireless networks to be important access
link. However, it does not provides particular test cases to link. However, it does not provides particular test cases to
evaluate the performance of the candidate algorithm. In this evaluate the performance of the candidate algorithm. In this
document we device test cases specifically targeting cellular document we describe test cases specifically targeting cellular
networks such as LTE networks and Wi-Fi local networks. networks such as LTE networks and Wi-Fi local networks.
2. Terminologies 2. Terminologies
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119 [RFC2119] document are to be interpreted as described in RFC2119 [RFC2119]
3. Cellular Network Specific Test Cases 3. Cellular Network Specific Test Cases
skipping to change at page 6, line 25 skipping to change at page 7, line 5
(practically infinite bandwidth). The Internet and wired connection (practically infinite bandwidth). The Internet and wired connection
in this setup does not add any network impairments to the test, it in this setup does not add any network impairments to the test, it
only adds 10ms of one-way transport propagation delay. only adds 10ms of one-way transport propagation delay.
The path from the fixed user to mobile user is defines as "Downlink" The path from the fixed user to mobile user is defines as "Downlink"
and the path from mobile user to the fixed user is defined as and the path from mobile user to the fixed user is defined as
"Uplink". We assume that only uplink or downlink is congested for "Uplink". We assume that only uplink or downlink is congested for
the mobile users. Hence, we recommend that the uplink and downlink the mobile users. Hence, we recommend that the uplink and downlink
simulations are run separately. simulations are run separately.
uplink uplink
++))) +--------------------------> ++))) +-------------------------->
++-+ ((o)) ++-+ ((o))
| | / \ +-------+ +------+ +---+ | | / \ +-------+ +------+ +---+
+--+ / \----+ +-----+ +----+ | +--+ / \----+ +-----+ +----+ |
/ \ +-------+ +------+ +---+ / \ +-------+ +------+ +---+
UE BS EPC Internet fixed UE BS EPC Internet fixed
<--------------------------+ <--------------------------+
downlink downlink
Figure 1: Simulation Topology Figure 1: Simulation Topology
skipping to change at page 9, line 46 skipping to change at page 10, line 31
o End to end Media frame delay. For video, this means the delay o End to end Media frame delay. For video, this means the delay
from capture to display. from capture to display.
o Transport delay. o Transport delay.
o Algorithm stability in terms of rate variation. o Algorithm stability in terms of rate variation.
4. Wi-Fi Networks Specific Test Cases 4. Wi-Fi Networks Specific Test Cases
TBD Given the prevalence of Internet access links over Wi-Fi, it is
important to evaluate candidate RMCAT congestion control solutions
over Wi-Fi test cases. Such evaluations should also highlight the
inherent different characteristics of Wi-Fi networks in contrast to
Wired networks:
o The wireless radio channel is subject to interference from nearby
transmitters, multi-path fading, and shadowing, causing
fluctuations in link throughput and sometimes an error-prone
communication environment
o Available network bandwidth is not only shared over the air
between concurrent users, but also between uplink and downlink
traffic due to the half duplex nature of wireless transmission
medium.
o Packet transmissions over Wi-Fi are susceptible to contentions and
collisions over the air. Consequently, traffic load beyond a
certain utilization level over a Wi-Fi network can introduce
frequent collisions and significant network overhead. This, in
turn, leads to excessive delay, retransmission, loss and lower
effective bandwidth for applications.
o The IEEE 802.11 standard (i.e., Wi-Fi) supports multi-rate
transmission capabilities by dynamically choosing the most
appropriate modulation scheme for a given received signal
strength. A different choice of Physical-layer rate will lead to
different application-layer throughput.
o Presence of legacy 802.11b networks can significantly slow down
the rest of a modern Wi-Fi Network, since it takes longer to
transmit the same packet over a slower link than over a faster
link. [Editor's note: maybe include a reference here instead.]
o Handover from one Wi-Fi Access Point (AP) to another may cause
packet delay and loss.
o IEEE 802.11e defined EDCA/WMM (Enhanced DCF Channel Access/Wi-Fi
Multi-Media) to give voice and video streams higher priority over
pure data applications (e.g., file transfers).
As we can see here, presence of Wi-Fi network in different network
topologies and traffic arrival can exert different impact on the
network performance in terms of video transport rate, packet loss and
delay that, in turn, effect end-to-end real-time multimedia
congestion control.
Throughout this draft, unless otherwise mentioned, test cases are
described using 802.11g due to its wide availability in network
simulation platform. In practice, however, statistics collected from
enterprise networks show that the dominant physical modes are 802.11n
and 802.11ac, accounting for 73.6% and 22.5% of enterprise network
users, respectively. Whenever possible, it is recommended to extend
some of the experiments to 802.11n and 802.11ac, so as to reflect a
more modern Wi-Fi network setting.
Since Wi-Fi network normally connects to a wired infrastructure,
either the wired network or the Wi-Fi network could be the
bottleneck. In the following section, we describe basic test cases
for both scenarios separately. The same set of performance metrics
as in [I-D.ietf-rmcat-eval-test]) should be collected for each test
case.
While all test cases described below can be carried out using
simulations, e.g. based on [ns-2] or [ns-3], it is also recommended
to perform testbed-based evaluations using Wi-Fi access points and
endpoints running up-to-date IEEE 802.11 protocols. [Editor's Note:
need to add some more discussions on the pros and cons of simulation-
based vs. testbed-based evaluations. It will be good to provide
recommended testbed configurations. ]
4.1. Bottleneck in Wired Network
The test scenarios below are intended to mimic the set up of video
conferencing over Wi-Fi connections from the home. Typically, the
Wi-Fi home network is not congested and the bottleneck is present
over the wired home access link. Although it is expected that test
evaluation results from this section are similar to those from test
cases defined for wired networks (see [I-D.ietf-rmcat-eval-test]), it
is worthwhile to run through these tests as sanity checks.
4.1.1. Network topology
Figure 2 shows topology of the network for Wi-Fi test cases. The
test contains multiple mobile nodes (MNs) connected to a common Wi-Fi
access point (AP) and their corresponding wired clients on fixed
nodes (FNs). Each connection carries either RMCAT or TCP traffic
flow. Directions of the flows can be uplink, downlink, or bi-
directional.
uplink
+----------------->+
+------+ +------+
| MN_1 |)))) /=====| FN_1 |
+------+ )) // +------+
. )) // .
. )) // .
. )) // .
+------+ +----+ +-----+ +------+
| MN_N | ))))))) | | | |========| FN_N |
+------+ | | | | +------+
| AP |=========| FN0 |
+----------+ | | | | +----------+
| MN_tcp_1 | )))) | | | |======| MN_tcp_1 |
+----------+ +----+ +-----+ +----------+
. )) \\ .
. )) \\ .
. )) \\ .
+----------+ )) \\ +----------+
| MN_tcp_M |))) \=====| MN_tcp_M |
+----------+ +----------+
+<-----------------+
downlink
Figure 2: Network topology for Wi-Fi test cases
4.1.2. Test setup
o Test duration: 120s
o Wi-Fi network characteristics:
* Radio propagation model: Log-distance path loss propagation
model [NS3WiFi]
* PHY- and MAC-layer configuration: IEEE 802.11g
* PHY-layer link rate: 54 Mbps
o Wired path characteristics:
* Path capacity: 1Mbps
* One-Way propagation delay: 50ms.
* Maximum end-to-end jitter: 30ms
* Bottleneck queue type: Drop tail.
* Bottleneck queue size: 300ms.
* Path loss ratio: 0%.
o Application characteristics:
* Media Traffic:
+ Media type: Video
+ Media direction: See Section 4.1.3
+ Number of media sources (N): See Section 4.1.3
+ Media timeline:
- Start time: 0s.
- End time: 119s.
* Competing traffic:
+ Type of sources: long-lived TCP
+ Traffic direction: See Section 4.1.3
+ Number of sources (M): See Section 4.1.3
+ Congestion control: Default TCP congestion control [TBD]
+ Traffic timeline:
- Start time: 0s
- End time: 119s
4.1.3. Typical test scenarios
o Single uplink RMCAT flow: N=1 with uplink direction and M=0.
o One pair of bi-directional RMCAT flows: N=2 (with one uplink flow
and one downlink flow); M=0.
o One RMCAT flow competing against one long-live TCP flow over
uplink: N=1 (uplink) and M = 1(uplink).
4.1.4. Expected behavior
o Single uplink RMCAT flow: the candidate algorithm is expected to
detect the path capacity constraint, converges to bottleneck
link's capacity and adapt the flow to avoid unwanted oscillation
when the sending bit rate is approaching the bottleneck link's
capacity. No excessive rate oscillations.
o Bi-directional RMCAT flows: It is expected that the candidate
algorithms is able to converge to the bottleneck capacity of the
wired path on both directions despite of the presence of
measurement noise over the Wi-Fi connection.
o One RMCAT flow competing with long-live TCP flow over uplink: the
candidate algorithm should be able to avoid congestion collapse,
and stabilize at a fair share of the bottleneck capacity over the
wired path.
4.2. Bottleneck in Wi-Fi Network
These test cases assume that the wired portion along the media path
are well-provisioned. The bottleneck is in the Wi-Fi network over
wireless. This is to mimic the enterprise/coffee-house scenarios.
4.2.1. Network topology
Same as defined in Section 4.1.1
4.2.2. Test setup
o Test duration: 120s
o Wi-Fi network characteristics:
* Radio propagation model: Log-distance path loss propagation
model [NS3WiFi]
* PHY- and MAC-layer configuration: IEEE 802.11g
* PHY-layer link rate: 54 Mbps
o Wired path characteristics:
* Path capacity: 100Mbps
* One-Way propagation delay: 50ms.
* Maximum end-to-end jitter: 30ms
* Bottleneck queue type: Drop tail.
* Bottleneck queue size: 300ms.
* Path loss ratio: 0%.
o Application characteristics:
* Media Traffic:
+ Media type: Video
+ Media direction: See Section 4.2.3
+ Number of media sources (N): See Section 4.2.3
+ Media timeline:
- Start time: 0s.
- End time: 119s.
* Competing traffic:
+ Type of sources: long-lived TCP
+ Number of sources (M): See Section 4.2.3
+ Traffic direction: See Section 4.2.3
+ Congestion control: Default TCP congestion control [TBD]
+ Traffic timeline:
- Start time: 0s
- End time: 119s
4.2.3. Typical test scenarios
This sections describes a few specific test scenarios that are deemed
as important for understanding behavior of a RMCAT candidate solution
over a Wi-Fi network.
o Multiple RMCAT Flows Sharing the Wireless Downlink: N=16 (all
downlink); M = 0; This test case is for studying the impact of
contention on competing RMCAT flows. Specifications for IEEE
802.11g with a physical-layer transmission rate of 54 Mbps is
chosen. Note that retransmission and MAC-layer headers and
control packets may be sent at a lower link speed. The total
application-layer throughput (reasonable distance, low
interference and small number of contention stations) for 802.11g
is around 20 Mbps. Consequently, a total of N=16 RMCAT flows are
needed for saturating the wireless interface in this experiment.
Evaluation of a given candidate solution should focus on whether
downlink RMCAT flows can stabilize at a fair share of bandwidth.
o Multiple RMCAT Flows Sharing the Wireless Uplink: N = 16 (all
downlink); M = 0; When multiple clients attempt to transmit video
packets uplink over the wireless interface, they introduce more
frequent contentions and potentially collisions. Per-flow
throughput is expected to be lower than that in the previous
downlink-only scenario. Evaluation of a given candidate solution
should focus on whether uplink flows can stabilize at a fair share
of bandwidth.
o Multiple Bi-directional RMCAT Flows: N = 16 (8 uplink and 8
downlink); M = 0. The goal of this test is to evaluate
performance of the candidate solution in terms of bandwidth
fairness between uplink and downlink flow.
o Multiple RMCAT flows in the presence of background TCP traffic:
the goal of this test is to evaluate how RMCAT flows compete
against TCP over a congested Wi-Fi network for a given candidate
solution. [Editor's Note: more detailed description will be added
in the next version in terms of directoin/number of RMCAT and TCP
flows. ]
o Varying number of RMCAT flows: the goal of this test is to
evaluate how a candidate RMCAT solution responds to varying
traffic load/demand over a congested Wi-Fi network. [Editor's
Note: more detailed description will be added in the next version
in terms of arrival/departure pattern of the flows.]
4.2.4. Expected behavior
o Multiple downlink RMCAT flows: All RMCAT flows should get fair
share of the bandwidth. Overall bandwidth usage should be no less
than same case with TCP flows (using TCP as performance
benchmark). The delay and loss should be within acceptable range
for real-time multimedia flow.
o Multiple uplink RMCAT flows: overall bandwidth usage shared by all
RMCAT flows should be no less than those shared by the same number
of TCP flows (i.e., benchmark performance using TCP flows).
o Multiple bi-directional RMCAT flows: overall bandwidth usage
shared by all RMCAT flows should be no less than those shared by
the same number of TCP flows (i.e., benchmark performance using
TCP flows). All downlink RMCAT flows are expected to obtain
similar bandwidth with respect to each other.
4.3. Potential Potential Test Cases
4.3.1. EDCA/WMM usage
EDCA/WMM is prioritized QoS with four traffic classes (or Access
Categories) with differing priorities. RMCAT flow should have better
performance (lower delay, less loss) with EDCA/WMM enabled when
competing against non-interactive background traffic (e.g., file
transfers). When most of the traffic over Wi-Fi is dominated by
media, however, turning on WMM may actually degrade performance.
This is a topic worthy of further investigation.
4.3.2. Legacy 802.11b Effects
When there is 802.11b devices connected to modern 802.11 network, it
may affect the performance of the whole network. Additional test
cases can be added to evaluate the affects of legacy devices on the
performance of RMCAT congestion control algorithm.
5. Conclusion 5. Conclusion
This document defines two test cases that are considered important This document defines a collection of test cases that are considered
for cellular networks. Moreover, this document also provides a important for cellular and Wi-Fi networks. Moreover, this document
framework to define more additional test cases for cellular network. also provides a framework for defining additional test cases over
wireless cellular/Wi-Fi networks.
6. Acknowledgements 6. Acknowledgements
We would like to thank Tomas Frankkila, Magnus Westerlund, Kristofer We would like to thank Tomas Frankkila, Magnus Westerlund, Kristofer
Sandlund for their valuable comments while writing this draft. Sandlund for their valuable comments while writing this draft.
7. IANA Considerations 7. IANA Considerations
This memo includes no request to IANA. This memo includes no request to IANA.
skipping to change at page 11, line 8 skipping to change at page 19, line 14
[HO-UMTS-3GPP] [HO-UMTS-3GPP]
TS 25.331, 3GPP., "Radio Resource Control (RRC); Protocol TS 25.331, 3GPP., "Radio Resource Control (RRC); Protocol
specification", December 2011, specification", December 2011,
<http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/specs/ <http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/specs/
archive/25_series/25.331/25331-990.zip>. archive/25_series/25.331/25331-990.zip>.
[I-D.ietf-rmcat-eval-criteria] [I-D.ietf-rmcat-eval-criteria]
Singh, V. and J. Ott, "Evaluating Congestion Control for Singh, V. and J. Ott, "Evaluating Congestion Control for
Interactive Real-time Media", draft-ietf-rmcat-eval- Interactive Real-time Media", draft-ietf-rmcat-eval-
criteria-03 (work in progress), March 2015. criteria-04 (work in progress), October 2015.
[NS3WiFi] "Wi-Fi Channel Model in NS3 Simulator",
<https://www.nsnam.org/doxygen/
classns3_1_1_yans_wifi_channel.html>.
[QoS-3GPP] [QoS-3GPP]
TS 23.203, 3GPP., "Policy and charging control TS 23.203, 3GPP., "Policy and charging control
architecture", June 2011, <http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/specs/ architecture", June 2011, <http://www.3gpp.org/ftp/specs/
archive/23_series/23.203/23203-990.zip>. archive/23_series/23.203/23203-990.zip>.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
<http://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.
9.2. Informative References 9.2. Informative References
[I-D.ietf-rmcat-cc-requirements] [I-D.ietf-rmcat-cc-requirements]
Jesup, R. and Z. Sarker, "Congestion Control Requirements Jesup, R. and Z. Sarker, "Congestion Control Requirements
for Interactive Real-Time Media", draft-ietf-rmcat-cc- for Interactive Real-Time Media", draft-ietf-rmcat-cc-
requirements-09 (work in progress), December 2014. requirements-09 (work in progress), December 2014.
[I-D.ietf-rmcat-eval-test] [I-D.ietf-rmcat-eval-test]
Sarker, Z., Singh, V., Zhu, X., and M. Ramalho, "Test Sarker, Z., Singh, V., Zhu, X., and M. Ramalho, "Test
Cases for Evaluating RMCAT Proposals", draft-ietf-rmcat- Cases for Evaluating RMCAT Proposals", draft-ietf-rmcat-
eval-test-01 (work in progress), March 2015. eval-test-02 (work in progress), September 2015.
[IEEE802.11] [IEEE802.11]
"Standard for Information technology--Telecommunications "Standard for Information technology--Telecommunications
and information exchange between systems Local and and information exchange between systems Local and
metropolitan area networks--Specific requirements Part 11: metropolitan area networks--Specific requirements Part 11:
Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical
Layer (PHY) Specifications", 2012. Layer (PHY) Specifications", 2012.
[LTE-simulator] [LTE-simulator]
"NS-3, A discrete-Event Network Simulator", "NS-3, A discrete-Event Network Simulator",
<https://www.nsnam.org/docs/release/3.23/manual/html/ <https://www.nsnam.org/docs/release/3.23/manual/html/
index.html>. index.html>.
[ns-2] "The Network Simulator - ns-2",
<http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns/>.
[ns-3] "The Network Simulator - ns-3", <https://www.nsnam.org/>.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Zaheduzzaman Sarker Zaheduzzaman Sarker
Ericsson AB Ericsson AB
Laboratoriegraend 11 Laboratoriegraend 11
Luleae 97753 Luleae 97753
Sweden Sweden
Phone: +46 107173743 Phone: +46 107173743
Email: zaheduzzaman.sarker@ericsson.com Email: zaheduzzaman.sarker@ericsson.com
skipping to change at page 12, line 4 skipping to change at page 20, line 20
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Zaheduzzaman Sarker Zaheduzzaman Sarker
Ericsson AB Ericsson AB
Laboratoriegraend 11 Laboratoriegraend 11
Luleae 97753 Luleae 97753
Sweden Sweden
Phone: +46 107173743 Phone: +46 107173743
Email: zaheduzzaman.sarker@ericsson.com Email: zaheduzzaman.sarker@ericsson.com
Ingemar Johansson Ingemar Johansson
Ericsson AB Ericsson AB
Laboratoriegraend 11 Laboratoriegraend 11
Luleae 97753 Luleae 97753
Sweden Sweden
Phone: +46 10 7143042 Phone: +46 10 7143042
Email: ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com Email: ingemar.s.johansson@ericsson.com
Xiaoqing Zhu
Cisco Systems
12515 Research Blvd., Building 4
Austin, TX 78759
USA
Email: xiaoqzhu@cisco.com
Jiantao Fu
Cisco Systems
707 Tasman Drive
Milpitas, CA 95035
USA
Email: jianfu@cisco.com
Wei-Tian Tan
Cisco Systems
725 Alder Drive
Milpitas, CA 95035
USA
Email: dtan2@cisco.com
Michael A. Ramalho
Cisco Systems
8000 Hawkins Road
Sarasota, FL 34241
USA
Phone: +1 919 476 2038
Email: mramalho@cisco.com
 End of changes. 18 change blocks. 
30 lines changed or deleted 414 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.42. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/