NS-2 Model of HomePlug AV PLC Technology

Pittolo

IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun.

et al. 2016

207

114

In recent decades, power line communication has attracted considerable attention from the research community and industry, as well as from regulatory and standardization bodies. In this article we provide an overview of both narrowband and broadband systems, covering potential applications, regulatory and standardization efforts and recent research advancements in channel characterization, physical layer performance, medium access and higher layer specifications and evaluations. We also identify areas of current and further study that will enable the continued success of power line communication technology.essentially concerned with coexistence with other systems that also use the power grid (i.e. machines and appliances that draw electricity) and wireless systems operating in the same frequency bands as PLC. The frequency range used for today's PLC solutions starts as low as 125 Hz and reaches as high as 100 MHz. A useful classification of PLC systems according to frequency bands has been introduced in [28]: it distinguishes between ultra-narrowband (UNB), narrowband (NB) and broadband (BB) PLC systems, operating between about 125-3000 Hz, 3-500 kHz and 1.8-100 MHz, respectively. Most recent developments in standardization and regulation activities over the past 20 or so years apply to NB and BB PLC systems, and we will focus on these in the following.

Section: ) Strict Prioritization -Benefits and Drawbacksmentioning

confidence: 99%

State of the Art in Power Line Communications: From the Applications to the Medium

Pittolo

IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun.

et al. 2016

207

114

“…As far as the authors know, channel differentiation in PLC networks has only been partially evaluated in [6], [7], [8] and [9]. In [6], the performance of the network is studied when one priority user is present both in saturated and unsaturated conditions.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Then, in [7] an experimental evaluation using a PLC testbed is performed, 1 to 4 high-priority flows contend for the channel in the presence of low-priority flows, CA3 and CA1 access categories are considered. In [8], the access differentiation is evaluated for different frame sizes and numbers of nodes. Finally, in [9], the performance while the number of nodes increases is evaluated for 3 different CAs.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Performance evaluation of the priority resolution scheme in PLC networks

18th IEEE International Symposium on Power Line Communications and Its Applications

2014

Abstract-Power Line Communications standards, such asHomeplug and IEEE 1901, aim to provide strict channel access prioritisation in CSMA/CA mode. This is achieved by making lower-priority access categories postpone contention when packets belonging to categories with higher priority are pending for transmission. For this purpose, specific slots in which stations advertise the priority of the current packets to be transmitted are allocated. However, they are only present after the occurrence of successful frame exchanges. Thus, in lightly loaded conditions as well as after channel errors or collisions, the priority resolution mechanism is not employed. In this work, we evaluate the implications of these features on the QoS experienced by each access category. Results show the network provides a complex performance behaviour caused by the interdependence of higherpriority traffic contention and lower-priority traffic preemption.

“…The priority resolution scheme defined in the Homeplug and IEEE 1901 standards has not yet been exhaustively studied. As far as we know, channel differentiation in PLC networks has only been partially evaluated in [6], [7], [8] and [9]. In [6], the performance of the network is studied when one priority user is present.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Then, in [7] an experimental evaluation using a PLC testbed is performed, 1 to 4 high-priority flows contend for the channel in the presence of low-priority flows, CA3 and CA1 access categories are considered. In [8], the access differentiation is evaluated for different frame sizes and number of nodes. Then, in [9], the performance while the number of nodes increases is evaluated for 3 different CAs.…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

When priority resolution goes way too far: An experimental evaluation in PLC networks

2015 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC)

2015

Power Line Communication (PLC) devices are increasingly used and available. However, research carried out at the Medium Access Control (MAC) layer is limited. This article addresses Quality of Service (QoS) mechanisms defined in the widely implemented Homeplug and IEEE 1901 standards. By means of a testbed constructed from off-the-shelf components we identify a number of issues with a potentially significant impact on user satisfaction: i) a pronounced starvation and variability of lower-priority traffic when different access categories are combined and ii) an oscillatory behaviour in higher-priority and high-traffic configurations. We also determine the underlying causes of such findings and propose possible solutions. Our contributions are of relevance to both the research community and manufacturers, as we identify crucial aspects to be revisited in order to guarantee successful advancement and further adoption of the technology.