2016 International Conference on Information Networking (ICOIN) 2016
DOI: 10.1109/icoin.2016.7427076
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Multi-flow rate control in delayed Wi-Fi offloading systems

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
5
2

Relationship

1
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 13 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Second, a sequential scheduling of a single flow in an EDF manner is motivated by the following rationales that (i) an urgent flow has less opportunities of data transfer than others, and (ii) serving multiple flows concurrently generates frequent switching between flows with active transmission, causing overheads such as switching delay and small data rates due to the need of TCP's ramping-up time (i.e., slow-start). We note that the sequential flow scheduling does not hurt the performance of offloading efficiency when the scheduling interval is short enough and the achievable sum throughput is independent of the number of activated flows; D 2 Sched is an optimal scheduling policy in terms of offloading ratio for a fixed Wi-Fi and cellular throughputs [36]. In spite of time-varying nature of wireless connections, D 2 Sched is expected to work in an highly efficient way, because Cedos's efficient Wi-Fi offloading targets at long flows, and mobile users are typically in indoor Wi-Fi networks, where data rate variations are reasonably small [37].…”
Section: Tp Flow Schedulingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Second, a sequential scheduling of a single flow in an EDF manner is motivated by the following rationales that (i) an urgent flow has less opportunities of data transfer than others, and (ii) serving multiple flows concurrently generates frequent switching between flows with active transmission, causing overheads such as switching delay and small data rates due to the need of TCP's ramping-up time (i.e., slow-start). We note that the sequential flow scheduling does not hurt the performance of offloading efficiency when the scheduling interval is short enough and the achievable sum throughput is independent of the number of activated flows; D 2 Sched is an optimal scheduling policy in terms of offloading ratio for a fixed Wi-Fi and cellular throughputs [36]. In spite of time-varying nature of wireless connections, D 2 Sched is expected to work in an highly efficient way, because Cedos's efficient Wi-Fi offloading targets at long flows, and mobile users are typically in indoor Wi-Fi networks, where data rate variations are reasonably small [37].…”
Section: Tp Flow Schedulingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This latency may be partially compensated for by a faster task execution time at the cloud server. The basic tradeoffs involving these attributes and how they relate to the decision to offload task execution have been studied extensively (Wu and Wolter (2017); Mehmeti and Spyropoulos (2016); Zhang and Cao (2018); Zhang et al (2015); Kim et al (2016)).…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Wireless signals (Wi-Fi) generated by smartphones are detected by sensors in the store. In a recent study related to mobile devices, the Wi-Fi activation index ratio is approximately 48.2% [34,35]. Therefore, assuming most visiting customers have mobile phones, about half of all mobile devices and their MAC addresses could be detected.…”
Section: Location-based Tracking Technologymentioning
confidence: 99%