Bluetooth dynamic scheduling and interference mitigation
Mobile Networks and Applications
Wi-Fi (802.11b) and Bluetooth: enabling coexistence
IEEE Network: The Magazine of Global Internetworking
Dynamic Adaptive Frequency Hopping for Mutually Interfering Wireless Personal Area Networks
IEEE Transactions on Mobile Computing
QoS provisioning in IEEE 802.11-compliant networks: Past, present, and future
Computer Networks: The International Journal of Computer and Telecommunications Networking
Coexistence of IEEE 802.11b and bluetooth: an integrated performance analysis
Mobile Networks and Applications
EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking - Cognitive Radio and Dynamic Spectrum Sharing Systems
Entropy-maximization based adaptive frequency hopping for wireless medical telemetry systems
Proceedings of the 1st ACM international workshop on Medical-grade wireless networks
Performance analysis of 802.11b networks in the presence of interference-aware Bluetooth devices
The Fourth International Conference on Heterogeneous Networking for Quality, Reliability, Security and Robustness & Workshops
Development and quantitative analysis of an adaptive scheme for Bluetooth and Wi-Fi co-existence
CCNC'09 Proceedings of the 6th IEEE Conference on Consumer Communications and Networking Conference
Simulation and performance analysis of 802.15.1
Proceedings of the International Conference and Workshop on Emerging Trends in Technology
Computers and Electrical Engineering
Hi-index | 0.00 |
In this paper, we investigate the use of Adaptive Frequency Hopping (AFH) techniques aimed at modifying the Bluetooth frequency hopping sequence in the presence of WLAN direct sequence spread spectrum devices. We examine the conditions such as the applications, topologies, and scenarios under which AFH techniques improve performance that is measured in terms of packet loss, TCP delay, and channel efficiency. We also compare the results obtained with AFH to others obtained using a scheduling technique that consist in delay ing the transmission of a Bluetooth packet until the medium is "idle". Our results show that an obvious performance improvement with AFH is in terms of delay and throughput. AFH brings the delay down to the same level than when no interference is present. On the other hand, AFH is rather slow in responding to changes in the environment and the packet loss is more significant than with the scheduling. This is probably due to the limitations imposed by the communication overhead. The main difficulty for AFH is having to dynamically communicate the changes to all slaves in the piconet in order to keep the synchronization.