Pertanika J. Sci. & Technol.

25 (4): 1343 - 1356 (2017)

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

Journal homepage: http://www.pertanika.upm.edu.my/

Wi-Fi and WiMax QoS Performance Analysis on High-Level-

Traffic using OPNET Modeler

Khiat, A.1*, Bahnasse, A.2, El Khaili, M.1 and Bakkoury, J.1

1
Laboratory SSDIA, ENSET Mohammedia, University Hassan II, Casablanca, 159 Morocco
2
Laboratory LTI, Faculty of Sciences Ben Msik, University Hassan II, Casablanca, 9167Morocco

ABSTRACT
Heterogeneous networks continue to be operate thanks to the various services they offer, especially in
terms of mobility, wide coverage and rapid deployment. However, quality of service (QoS) is a major
challenge for these networks, which often consist of different technologies (WiMAX, WIFI, UMTS, LTE,
etc.). This study measures and evaluates the behaviour of Web-based applications in a vertical handover
context between 802.16e and 802.11e technologies, taking into account all possible QoS mechanisms.
The evaluation scenarios were performed using OPNET Modeler. The applications used are: Dynamic
web (HTTP + database) and mail flow. The evaluation criteria used are: TCP delay, HTTP load page
delay, DB query delay, mail download and upload delay.

Keywords: 802.16e, 802.11e, HTTP, OPNET Modeler, QoS, Vertical Handover; Web-Based

INTRODUCTION
Digital communication technologies play a major role in connecting users in remote
geographical areas. This is often carried out trough heterogeneous wireless networks.
Today, information exchanges concern not only email exchanges but also Web-based
services, including dynamic web and Web-
oriented messaging services (Gmail, Yahoo,
Hotmail, etc.). Figure 1 presents the statistics
published by EuroStat (http://ec.europa.eu/
ARTICLE INFO
eurostat/statistics-explained/) and it is clear
Article history:
Received: 05 June 2017 that companies, through various scales,
Accepted: 23 September 2017
currently have a tendency to network mobility
E-mail addresses:
and are increasingly deploying Web-based
[email protected]; [email protected] (Khiat, A.), applications thanks to their reduced costs,
[email protected] (Bahnasse, A.),
[email protected] (El Khaili, M.), simplicity, ease of use and its multi-platform
[email protected] (Bakkoury, J.) aspect.
*Corresponding Author

ISSN: 0128-7680 2017 Universiti Putra Malaysia Press.

 explained/) and it is clear that companies, through various scales, currently

have a tendency to network mobility and are increasingly deploying Web-based

applications thanks to their reduced costs, simplicity, ease of use and its multi-
Khiat, A., Bahnasse, A., El Khaili, M. and Bakkoury, J.
platform aspect.

Figure 1. Enterprise use of information technology, by size class. Adapted from Mobile connection to internet,
Figure 1. Enterprise use of information technology, by size class. Adapted from
by EuroStat, 2016 (http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php/Mobile_connection_to_internet).
In the public domain
"Mobile connection to internet," by EuroStat, 2016

Handover
Handover or Handoff in wireless networks is the ability to switch from one access technology
to another without losing the connection and having to reconnect (Khiat, Bakkoury, El Khaili,
& Bahnasse, 2016).
The Handover types are shown in Figure 2 and listed4 below:
Horizontal handover: between two cells managed by the same technology (for example
between two WIFI cells).
Vertical handover: between two cells managed by different technologies (for example
between WiMAX and Wi-Fi).

Figure 2. Horizontal and Vertical Handover. From Study and Evaluation of Vertical and Horizontal Handovers
Scalability Using OPNET Figure 2. Horizontal
Modeler, by A. Khiat,and Vertical M.
J. Bakkoury, Handover. From
El Khaili, & "Study and
A. Bahnasse, 2016,Evaluation of
International
Journal of Computer Science and Information Security, 14(11), p. 807. Copyright 2016 by International Journal
of Computer Science and Information
Vertical Security Handover's Scalability Using OPNET Modeler," by A.
and Horizontal

1344 Khiat, J. Bakkoury, M. &

Pertanika J. Sci. ElTechnol.
Khaili,25&(4):
A.1343
Bahnasse, 2016, International Journal
- 1356 (2017)

of Computer Science and Information Security, 14(11), p. 807. Copyright 2016

by International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security.

 Wi-Fi and WiMax QoS Performance Analysis using OPNET Modeler

IEEE 802.11
WIFI is an international standard describing the wireless LAN characteristics (WLAN). In
general, its the name of the IEEE 80211 standard (Crow, Widjaja, Kim, & Sakai, 1997).
The 802.11b protocol allows a throughput of 11 Mbits to 22 Mbits per second, while the
802.11g protocol allows reaching a theoretical throughput of 54 Mbps.
IEEE 802.11e (Mangold et al., 2002) is an enhanced version of the IEEE802.11 introducing
QoS at the MAC layer for the transport of voice, audio and video traffic through the WLAN.

IEEE 802.16
WiMAX means Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access. Its a set of technical
standards based on the 802.16 (Eklund, Marks, Stanwood, & Wang, 2002) radio transmission
standard allowing the transmission of broadband IP data over the air. The maximum theoretical
throughput supported by the WiMAXis 70 Mbit / s over a theoretical distance of several tens
of kilometres.
In other words, the WiMAX is an alternative solution for the broadband networks
deployment in the territories, whether or not covered by other technologies such as ADSL or
cable. The WiMAX makes it possible to use both sedentary and nomadic broadband network.
IEEE 802.16e (Choi, Hwang, Kwon, Lim, & Cho, 2005; So-In, Jain, & Tamimi, 2009)
this standard was validated in September 2004 and uses the frequency band from 2 to 6 GHz.
In practice WiMAX allows a broadband connection while moving at less than 122 km/h. The
WIMAX mobile would be a real alternative for transport networks.

Quality of Service
Quality of Service (QoS) is the ability to convey a particular traffic type, in good conditions,
in terms of throughput, transmission delays, availability and packet loss rate.
In the heterogeneous networks context (WiFI and WiMAX) the QoS mechanisms
implementation is essential, especially since these networks are open access, so a network
access management is paramount.
To ensure adequate quality of service in wireless networks, the IEEE 802.11 standard
defines two channel access methods:
Distributed Coordination Function (DCF) (Wu, Cheng, Peng, Long, & Ma, 2002;
Bianchi, 2000)
Point Coordination Function (PCF) (Liu, Zhao, & Zhou, 2011; Oh & Kim, 2005)

The 802.11e standard aims to provide QoS capabilities at the data link layer (HCF Hybrid
Coordination Function). Its purpose is to define the different packet needs in terms of bandwidth
and transmission delay in order to allow better transmission of voice and video.

Pertanika J. Sci. & Technol. 25 (4): 1343 - 1356 (2017) 1345

 Khiat, A., Bahnasse, A., El Khaili, M. and Bakkoury, J.

In this standard, two new QoS mechanisms are defined:

EDCA (Enhanced Distribution Channel Access) (Ge, Hou, & Choi, 2007; Tao &
Panwar, 2006)
HCCA (HCF controlled channel access) (Cicconetti, Lenzini, Mingozzi, & Stea, 2005)

The IEEE802.16e WiMAX standard offers four categories for traffic prioritisation:
1. Unsolicited Grant Service (UGS) (So-In, Jain, & Al-Tamimi, 2010)
2. Real time Polling Service (rtPS), (Zhang, Li, Feng, & Wu, 2006)
3. Non-real-time Polling Service (nrtPS) (Ghazal, Mokdad, & Ben-Othman, 2008)
4. Extended real time Polling Service (ertPS) (Abid et al., 2012)
5. Best Effort (BE).

Each of these service classes is intended for specific applications.

Unsolicited Grant Service (UGS): This service is designed to support services
depending on jitter delay or latency such as VoIP (Voice Over IP). It offers a strict
guarantee of throughput and latency;
Real time Polling Service (rtPS): Service supporting variable size data packets.
These are usually multimedia streams like MPEG video. It provides guarantees for
throughput, but gives a high latency tolerance;
Non-real-time Polling Service (nrtPS): This service guarantees only the throughput,
its intended for applications that do not depend on the latency time (such as Email);
Extended real time Polling Service (ertPS): is intended to support real-time data
streams characterised by a variable packets size received periodically;
Best Effort Service (BES): This service gives no guarantee, but offers all possibilities
for any application. Its mainly intended for applications like web access.

Table 1
Mapping Service Classes and Applications

Application Service Class

TI/EI (Over IP) UGS
VoIP without silence removal UGS
VoIP with silence removal ertPS
MPEG rtPS
FTP nrtPS
TFTP nrtPS
HTTP nrtPS
EMAIL BE
Note. Adapted from "QoS class mapping over heterogeneous networks using Application Service
Map," by M. S. Ryu, H. S. Park, & S. C. Shin, 2006, Proceedings of International Conference
on Networking Systems, and International Conference on Mobile Communications and Learning
Technologies, p. 13. Copyright 2006 by Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers

1346 Pertanika J. Sci. & Technol. 25 (4): 1343 - 1356 (2017)

 Wi-Fi and WiMax QoS Performance Analysis using OPNET Modeler

Table 2 presents a comparison between IEEE 802.16e and IEEE 802.11e.

Table 2
IEEE 802.11e vs IEEE 802.16e

IEEE 802.11e IEEE 802.16e

Deployment Short cover (local) Large cover
Frequency bands 2.4, 2.5 and 5 GHz Between 2 and 6 GHz
Throughput (theoretical) Up to 54 Mb/s Up to 30 Mb/s
Supported mobility type Low mobility Low, simple and full mobility
Modulation OFDM Scalable OFDMA
QoS Service Classes Voice UGS
Video rt-PS
Controlled load nrt-PS
Excellent effort BE
Best effort
Background
Note. Adapted from Mobius Consulting, Copyright 2007 by Motorola

The rest of the paper is organised as follows: the second section discusses Web-based
applications. In the third section, related works to the problem of Web-based applications
performance in heterogeneous networks WiFI and WiMAX are presented. An evaluation
environment is presented as well discussions on the results obtained in section five while0 the
sixth section concludes the paper.

Web-Based Applications
A web application can be manipulated through a web browser. Web messaging, content
management systems and wikis are web applications. In the same way as websites, a web
application is usually placed on a server and is manipulated by operating widgets using a web
browser, via a computer network (Internet, intranet, LAN etc.). Web-based applications belong
to the seven layers of the OSI model. However, these applications are transported through the
TCP protocol of the OSI model transport layer.
The TCP protocol, considered as reliable, opens a session before data exchange. The
session opening, called three-way handshake, allows to reserve the resources between a client
entity and the other server.
The TCP protocol, through sequencing mechanisms, can detect retransmission errors and
send only lost segments in the network.
This protocol can be evaluated according to the session opening delay and the
retransmission number.
Among the main categories of applications deployed in the Web is the dynamic Web (HTTP
protocols, Database) and e-mail (SMTP). These two application categories will be discussed.
A dynamic web page is generated on demand, as opposed to a static web page. A dynamic

Pertanika J. Sci. & Technol. 25 (4): 1343 - 1356 (2017) 1347

 When a dynamic web page
Khiat, A., Bahnasse, A.,is
El viewed,
Khaili, M.an
andHTTP server
Bakkoury, J. sends the request to

the software
web page content can varycorresponding to this request,
based on information (time,and
userthe latterform
name, generates
filledand
outsends
by thethe
user,
etc.). Conversely, the static
page content.
web page content is in principle identical at each visit.
When a dynamic web page is viewed, an HTTP server sends the request to the software
corresponding to this request, and the latter generates and sends the page content.
Figure 3 illustrates an example of dynamic web operation with the flow of requests and
Figure 3 illustrates an example of dynamic web operation with the flow of
responses between systems.
requests and responses between systems.

Figure 3. Principle of dynamic web operation

Figure 3. Principle of dynamic web operation

Step 1: The client first opens a TCP session (on three phases) with the Web server.
Step 1: The client first opens a TCP session (on three phases) with the Web
Step 2: The client prepares the HTTP request to send to the server, this query often contains
a parameter, and thanks to it, the page will be built.
server.

Step server
Step 3: The Web 2: Thelogs
clientonprepares the HTTPserver,
to the database request to returns
and send to athe server,formed
request this query
by the
parameter requested by the auser
often contains of phase
parameter, two.
and thanks to it, the page will be built.

Step 3: The
Step 4: The database Web
server server the
executes logsquery.
on to the database server, and returns a request

formed by the parameter requested by the user of phase two.

Step 5: The database server sends the request result from phase three.
Step 4: The database server executes the query.
Step 6: The web server generates a new page containing the DB request result.

Step 7: The server delivers the generated page to the client.

Regarding e-mail, SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) is the standard protocol for
14
transferring mail from one server to another in point-to-point connection.
It is a protocol operating in connected mode, encapsulated in a TCP/IP frame. The mail is
delivered directly to the recipients mail server. The SMTP works through textual commands
sent to the SMTP server (by default on port 25).

1348 Pertanika J. Sci. & Technol. 25 (4): 1343 - 1356 (2017)

 Wi-Fi and WiMax QoS Performance Analysis using OPNET Modeler

Related Works
Grewal and Sharma (2010) studied the enhancement induced by quality of service mechanisms
in an 802.16 network, and the authors deployed a variety of applications but did not adopt the
nrtps model for Email and FTP applications, which is far from acceptable.
(Qasim (2013, pp. 91-93) compared between different IEEE 802.11 standards, such as b
and g, using HTTP traffic. This study was carried out taking into account scalability, but the
author did not introduce the DCF and PCF methods, which are currently indispensable for
obtaining quality communication.
Musaddiq, Hashmi and Jawed(2013) examined and compared Wireless and Wired
technologies without taking into account the quality of service or the applications diversity.
No study has focused on the effectiveness of web-based applications with particular
attention to quality of service in a heterogeneous network (Motorola and Intel, 2007) in a
vertical handover context.
Based on literature review, this study contributes to the body of knowledge by:
Showing the QoS interest in a vertical Handover;
Evaluating the different QoS mechanisms in 802.11e and 802.16e networks;
Taking into account the node mobility;
Diversifying applications (HTTP, SMTP and database);
Showing where the QoS is the most influencing.

METHODOLOGY
The study used the OPNET Modeler tool discussed by Lu & Yang (2012, p. 4), and several
simulators, such as NS2 discussed by Issariyakul & Hossain (2012, pp. 21-39), NS3 by Riley &
Henderson (2010) and OMNET by Varga (2010). The OPNET Modeler is currently considered
as one of the best simulators in the wireless networks field (Lucio, Paredes-Farrera, Jammeh,
Fleury, & Reed, 2003).
wireless networks field (Lucio, Paredes-Farrera, Jammeh, Fleury, & Reed,
A. The evaluation scenarios
2003).
The scenario chosen in the evaluations is shown in Figure 4.
A. The evaluation scenarios

The scenario chosen in the evaluations is shown in Figure 4.

Figure 4. Evaluation simulation

Figure model
4. Evaluation simulation model

Pertanika J. Sci. & Technol. 25 (4): 1343 - 1356 (2017) 1349

Based on this model, we have created various scenarios:

Scenario 1: No QoS on both WiMAX and Wi-Fi.

Scenario 2: PCF on WiFI, no QoS on WiMAX.

Scenario 3: HCF EDCA on WiFI, no QoS on WiMAX.

 Khiat, A., Bahnasse, A., El Khaili, M. and Bakkoury, J.

Based on this model, we have created various scenarios:

Scenario 1: No QoS on both WiMAX and Wi-Fi.
Scenario 2: PCF on WiFI, no QoS on WiMAX.
Scenario 3: HCF EDCA on WiFI, no QoS on WiMAX.
Scenario 4: No QoS on WiFI, QoS on WiMAX.
Scenario 5: HCF EDCA on WiFIand QoS on WiMAX.

B. The simulation parameters

The following are the settings used for the WiMAX antenna (Table 3):

Table 3
Base station parameters

Parameter Value
Antenna Gain 15 dBi
Number of transmitters SISO
Maximal transmission power 500 mW
PHY profile OFDM
Maximal power density -60 dBm
Minimal power density -110 dBm
The resource retention time 200 msec

The simulation parameters used in Wi-Fi scenarios are listed in Table 4 below:

Table 4
Access point parameters

Parameter Value
PHY mode Extended Rate PHY
Throughput 11 Mbps
Transmission power 0.005 W
Beacon interval 0.02 Secs
Buffer size 256 Kilobits

C. Application parameters
Application parameters and evaluation criteria are listed in Tables 5, 6, 7 and 8.

1350 Pertanika J. Sci. & Technol. 25 (4): 1343 - 1356 (2017)

 Wi-Fi and WiMax QoS Performance Analysis using OPNET Modeler

Table 5 Table 6
HTTP parameters DB parameters

Parameter Value Traffic Database

Traffic HTTP Object size 32768 bytes
Object size 10000 bytes Transaction MIX (Queries/Total 100%
HTTP Specification 1.1 Transactions)
Type of Service Background Type of Service Background

Table 7
Email parameters

Parameter Value
Traffic Email
Object size 2000 bytes
Send Group Mail 3
Type of Service Best Effort

Table 8
Evaluation criteria

Criteria Signification
TCP Delay (Sec) Delay (in seconds) of packets received by the TCP layers in the
complete network, for all connections. Its measured from the time an
application data packet is sent from the source TCP layer to the time
its completely received by the TCP layer in the destination node.
TCP Retransmission Total number of TCP retransmissions in the network. Written
when data is retransmitted from the TCP unacknowledged buffer.
Database Response Time (Sec) Time elapsed between sending a request and receiving the
response packet. Measured from the time when the Database
Query Application sends a request to the server to the time it
receives a response packet. Every response packet sent from
a server to an Database Query application is included in this
statistic.
HTTP Response Time (Sec) Specifies time required to retrieve the entire page with all the
contained inline (correct?) objects.
SMTP Download Time (Sec) Time elapsed between sending request for emails and receiving
emails from email server in the network. This includes signalling
delay for the connection setup.

Pertanika J. Sci. & Technol. 25 (4): 1343 - 1356 (2017) 1351

 setup.

Khiat, A., Bahnasse, A., El Khaili, M. and Bakkoury, J.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

The resultsand
RESULTS areDISCUSSIONS
summarised in Figure 5.
The results are summarised in Figure 5.

(c)
(a) (b)
(c)
(b) (b)

(a)

22

(c) (d)
(d)
(d)

23 23

(e)
(e) (c) Database Query Time (d) HTTP Response
Figure 5. Results achieved (a) TCP Delay (b) TCP Retransmission
(e)
Time (e) SMTP Download Time

1352 Pertanika J. Sci. & Technol. 25 (4): 1343 - 1356 (2017)

24
24
 Wi-Fi and WiMax QoS Performance Analysis using OPNET Modeler

The results from figure (a) and (b) illustrate the opening delay of a TCP session and the
retransmissions number. Based on these results, the DCF mode delay is the highest compared
with other scenarios, but the retransmissions number is the least. This is due to the fact that in
DCF, no classification is guaranteed, so all packets will be treated with the same preference
level (Wu et al., 2002).
On the other hand, in the HCF mode, a pre-classification is carried out causing a delay in
the BE flow to favour the Background traffic. The waiting time of the BE flow results in its
retransmission, and this is clearly noticed by the number of considerable retransmissions in
the PCF and HCF scenarios. We remind that the QoS interest is that it reduces processing and
transmission delay while seeking the highest reliability (Grewal & Sharma, 2010).
In the WiMAX network, the delay and the retransmissions number are too small given the
WiMAX nature (broadband). Concerning the dynamic web flow (c) and (d) we conclude that
the HCF mode offers the best results compared with the PCF and DCF modes. This is justified
by the fact that PCF
Fromuses
(e) pooling
it can bebut
seendoes
thatnot
the perform service
loading time of adifferentiation in contrast
mail remains fixed to
in all the
HCF mode.
scenarios
From (e) it can PCF,theHCF
be seen that and time
loading WiMAX. Thisremains
of a mail can befixed
justified
in allby
thethe fact that
scenarios the
PCF,
HCF and WiMAX. This can be justified by the fact that the amount of SMTP traffic exchanged
amount of SMTP traffic exchanged is too small compared with the dynamic
is too small compared with the dynamic web flow thanks to the classification process (Figure 6).
web flow thanks to the classification process (Figure 6).

Figure 6. Amount of traffic sent HTTP vs SMTP

Figure 6. Amount of traffic sent HTTP vs SMTP

CONCLUSION
CONCLUSION
This paper had studied and evaluated the Web-based applications performance (HTTP, DB,
SMTP) in a vertical handover
This between
paper had studiedthe two
and heterogeneous
evaluated networksapplications
the Web-based (802.16e and 802.11e).
performance
It had shown that quality of service is essential when switching from one access technology to
(HTTP,
another. In addition, DB, SMTP)
the different in a verticalapplicable
QoS mechanisms handover to
between the two
Web-based heterogeneous
applications were
studied and the results showed the HCF method efficiency compared with the PCF and DCF in
networks (802.16e and 802.11e). It had shown that quality of service is
an 802.11e network. However, we found a good network performance when deploying QoS in
essential when switching from one access technology to another. In addition,
Pertanika J. Sci. & Technol. 25 (4): 1343 - 1356 (2017) 1353
the different QoS mechanisms applicable to Web-based applications were
 Khiat, A., Bahnasse, A., El Khaili, M. and Bakkoury, J.

802.16e network. Finally, different HCF, PCF and QoS scenarios in WiMAX and Web-based
applications offered the same response delays.

REFERENCES
Abid, H., Raja, H., Munir, A., Amjad, J., Mazhar, A., & Lee, D. Y. (2012). Performance analysis of
Wimax best effort and ERTPS service classes for video transmission. Retrieved from https://link.
springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-3-642-31137-6_28
Bianchi, G. (2000). Performance analysis of the IEEE 802.11 distributed coordination function. IEEE
Journal on selected areas in communications, 18(3), 535-547.
Choi, S., Hwang, G. H., Kwon, T., Lim, A. R., & Cho, D. H. (2005). Fast handover scheme for real-
time downlink services in IEEE 802.16e BWA system. Proceedings of 61st Vehicular Technology
Conference. Stockholm, Sweden: IEEE. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1543679/
Cicconetti, C., Lenzini, L., Mingozzi, E., & Stea, G. (2005). A software architecture for simulating IEEE
802.11e HCCA. Proceeding of 3rd Workshop on Internet Performance, Simulation, Monitoring and
Measurement. Warsaw, Poland: Warsaw University of Technology. Retrieved from http://cng1.iet.
unipi.it/archive/ns2hcca/hcca_framework.pdf
Crow, B. P., Widjaja, I., Kim, J. G., & Sakai, P. T. (1997). IEEE 802.11 wireless local area networks.
IEEE Communications Magazine, 35(9), 116-126.
Eklund, C., Marks, R. B., Stanwood, K. L., & Wang, S. (2002). IEEE standard 802.16: a technical
overview of the WirelessMAN/sup TM/air interface for broadband wireless access. IEEE
Communications Magazine, 40(6), 98-107.
Eurostat. (2016). Mobile connection to internet. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-
explained/index.php/Mobile_connection_to_internet
Ge, Y., Hou, J. C., & Choi, S. (2007). An analytic study of tuning systems parameters in IEEE 802.11 e
enhanced distributed channel access. Computer Networks, 51(8), 1955-1980.
Ghazal, S., Mokdad, L., & Ben-Othman, J. (2008). Performance analysis of UGS, rtPS, nrtPS admission
control in WiMAX networks. Proceedings of International Conference on Communications. Beijing,
China: IEEE. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/4533545/
Grewal, V., & Sharma, A. K. (2010). On performance evaluation of different QoS mechanisms and AMC
scheme for an IEEE 802.16 based WiMAX network. International Journal of Computer Applications,
6(7), 0975-8887.
Issariyakul, T., & Hossain, E. (2012). Introduction to network simulator NS2 (2nd Ed.). Boston, MA:
Springer.
Khiat, A., Bakkoury, J., El Khaili, M., & Bahnasse, A. (2016). Study and Evaluation of Vertical and
Horizontal Handovers Scalability Using OPNET Modeler. International Journal of Computer Science
and Information Security, 14(11), 807.
Liu, Q., Zhao, D., & Zhou, D. (2011). An analytic model for enhancing IEEE 802.11 point coordination
function media access control protocol. Transactions on Emerging Telecommunications Technologies,
22(6), 332-338.
Lu, Z., & Yang, H. (2012). Unlocking the power of OPNET modeler. Cambridge, United Kingdom:
Cambridge University Press.

1354 Pertanika J. Sci. & Technol. 25 (4): 1343 - 1356 (2017)

 Wi-Fi and WiMax QoS Performance Analysis using OPNET Modeler

Lucio, G. F., Paredes-Farrera, M., Jammeh, E., Fleury, M., & Reed, M. J. (2003). Opnet modeler and
ns-2: Comparing the accuracy of network simulators for packet-level analysis using a network testbed.
WSEAS Transactions on Computers, 2(3), 700-707.
Mangold, S., Choi, S., May, P., Klein, O., Hiertz, G., & Stibor, L. (2002). IEEE 802.11e Wireless LAN for
Quality of Service. Proceedings of European Wireless. Florence, Italy: University of Pisa. Retrieved
from http://www2.ing.unipi.it/ew2002/proceedings/H2006.pdf
Motorola and Intel (2007). WiMAX and WIFI together: Deployment models and user scenarios. Retrieved
April 21, 2017, from https://www.mobiusconsulting.com/papers/6930_MotDoc.pdf
Musaddiq, A., Hashmi, U. S., & Jawed, S. (2013). Performance and cost evaluation of IEEE 802.11g
and 802.3i protocols for network connectivity at a university campus using OPNET simulation.
Proceedings of 15th International Conference on Computer Modelling and Simulation. Cambridge,
UK: IEEE. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/6527515/
Oh, S. M., & Kim, J. H. (2005). The analysis of the optimal contention period for broadband wireless
access network. Proceedings of Third International Conference on Pervasive Computing and
Communications Workshops. Kauai Island, HI: IEEE. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/
document/1392836/
Qasim, A. J. (2013). Performance Evaluation of Wireless Standards 802.11g and 802.11b on HTTP
Application over AODV Protocol using OPNET (Masters thesis, Eastern Mediterranean University,
Cyprus) Retrieved from http://hdl.handle.net/11129/1857
Riley, G. F., & Henderson, T. R. (2010). The ns-3 network simulator. In: Wehrle K., Gne M., Gross J.
(Eds.), Modeling and tools for network simulation (pp. 15-34). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.
Ryu, M. S., Park, H. S., & Shin, S. C. (2006). QoS class mapping over heterogeneous networks using
Application Service Map. Proceedings of International Conference on Networking Systems, and
International Conference on Mobile Communications and Learning Technologies. Morne, Mauritius:
IEEE. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/1628259/
So-In, C., Jain, R., & Tamimi, A. K. (2009). Scheduling in IEEE 802.16 e mobile WiMAX networks:
key issues and a survey. IEEE Journal on selected areas in communications, 27(2), 156-171.
So-In, C., Jain, R., & Al-Tamimi, A. K. (2010). A scheduler for unsolicited grant service (UGS) in IEEE
802.16 e mobile WiMAX networks. IEEE Systems Journal, 4(4), 487-494.
Tao, Z., & Panwar, S. (2006). Throughput and delay analysis for the IEEE 802.11 e enhanced distributed
channel access. IEEE Transactions on communications, 54(4), 596-603.
Varga A. (2010) OMNeT++. In K. Wehrle, M. Gne & J. Gross (Eds.), Modeling and Tools for Network
Simulation (pp. 35-59). Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg.
Wu, H., Cheng, S., Peng, Y., Long, K., & Ma, J. (2002). IEEE 802.11 distributed coordination function
(DCF): analysis and enhancement. Proceedings of International Conference on Communications.
New York, NY: IEEE. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/996924/
Zhang, H., Li, Y., Feng, S., & Wu, W. (2006). A new extended rtPS scheduling mechanism based on
multi-polling for VoIP service in IEEE 802.16 e system. Proceedings of International Conference
on Communication Technology. Guilin, China: IEEE. Retrieved from http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/
document/4146324/

Pertanika J. Sci. & Technol. 25 (4): 1343 - 1356 (2017) 1355