Logo
ScienceStack
Table of Contents
Fetching ...
Sign In

Can cloud-based VR streaming handle Wi-Fi OBSS contention?

Miguel Casasnovas, Marc Carrascosa-Zamacois, Boris Bellalta

TL;DR

The results demonstrate that the previously proposed Network-aware Step-wise adaptive bitrate algorithm for VR streaming (NeSt-VR) effectively mitigates performance degradation in OBSS environments, enabling VR streaming under heavier OBSS traffic conditions.

Abstract

This paper experimentally analyzes the negative impact of contention caused by neighboring Wi-Fi networks operating on overlapping channels on Virtual Reality (VR) streaming over Wi-Fi, focusing on scenarios of partial and full channel overlap within an 80 MHz channel. Our results show that (i) increasing the number of 80 MHz Overlapping Basic Service Sets (OBSSs) intensifies contention and degrades VR streaming performance; (ii) OBSS activity on the secondary-sided 40 MHz portion degrades performance more than activity on the primary-sided 40 MHz portion; (iii) for the same aggregate load, full channel overlap with two 40 MHz OBSS contenders is less detrimental than partial overlap with a single high-load 40 MHz contender, but more disruptive than full overlap with two 80 MHz contenders; and (iv) full channel overlap with two 40 MHz OBSS contenders has a smaller impact on VR streaming under symmetric traffic loads than under asymmetric loads. Moreover, our results demonstrate that our previously proposed Network-aware Step-wise adaptive bitrate algorithm for VR streaming (NeSt-VR) effectively mitigates performance degradation in OBSS environments, enabling VR streaming under heavier OBSS traffic conditions.

Can cloud-based VR streaming handle Wi-Fi OBSS contention?

TL;DR

The results demonstrate that the previously proposed Network-aware Step-wise adaptive bitrate algorithm for VR streaming (NeSt-VR) effectively mitigates performance degradation in OBSS environments, enabling VR streaming under heavier OBSS traffic conditions.

Abstract

This paper experimentally analyzes the negative impact of contention caused by neighboring Wi-Fi networks operating on overlapping channels on Virtual Reality (VR) streaming over Wi-Fi, focusing on scenarios of partial and full channel overlap within an 80 MHz channel. Our results show that (i) increasing the number of 80 MHz Overlapping Basic Service Sets (OBSSs) intensifies contention and degrades VR streaming performance; (ii) OBSS activity on the secondary-sided 40 MHz portion degrades performance more than activity on the primary-sided 40 MHz portion; (iii) for the same aggregate load, full channel overlap with two 40 MHz OBSS contenders is less detrimental than partial overlap with a single high-load 40 MHz contender, but more disruptive than full overlap with two 80 MHz contenders; and (iv) full channel overlap with two 40 MHz OBSS contenders has a smaller impact on VR streaming under symmetric traffic loads than under asymmetric loads. Moreover, our results demonstrate that our previously proposed Network-aware Step-wise adaptive bitrate algorithm for VR streaming (NeSt-VR) effectively mitigates performance degradation in OBSS environments, enabling VR streaming under heavier OBSS traffic conditions.

Paper Structure

This paper contains 21 sections, 7 figures, 1 table.

Table of Contents

  1. Introduction
  2. VR streaming over Wi-Fi
  3. VR streaming
  4. ALVR
  5. NeSt-VR
  6. Wi-Fi 6
  7. Experimental Setup
  8. Considered scenarios
  9. Test-bed
  10. Experimental results
  11. Coexistence with 80 MHz OBSSs (Scenario 1)
  12. Full channel overlap with one contender
  13. Full channel overlap with two contenders
  14. Takeaways
  15. Coexistence with 40 MHz OBSSs (Scenario 2)
  16. ...and 6 more sections

Figures (7)

  • Figure 1: Considered dense deployment scenario where a VR BSS coexists with multiple interfering OBSSs.
  • Figure 2: Illustration of the considered OBSS scenarios.
  • Figure 3: VF-RTT and target bitrate under Scenario 1, considering a single 80 MHz OBSS.
  • Figure 4: VF-RTT and target bitrate under Scenario 1, considering two 80 MHz OBSSs. $\text{OBSS A}~|~\text{OBSS B}$.
  • Figure 5: VF-RTT and target bitrate under Scenario 2, considering a single 40 MHz OBSS (OBSS A).
  • ...and 2 more figures