IP Library Granted Patent US 9,137,330
Granted Patent B2
US 9,137,330 · App. 11/080,853 · Granted Sep 15, 2015

Method of dynamically adjusting quality of service (QoS) targets

Inventors: Mark Haner (Westfield, NJ); Danielle Hinton (Cambridge, MA); Thierry Etienne Klein (Fanwood, NJ)
Assignee: Alcatel Lucent
H04L67/322H04L47/24
View Patent ↗
Loading inventors, assignments & file history…
Monitor This Case
Get email alerts when status or documents change.
Order Certified Copies
Most orders are placed with the USPTO same day — all within 24 business hours.
Order via The Patent Place →
Pre-filled with this patent's details
Quick Facts
Patent No.
US 9,137,330
App. No.
11/080,853
Granted
Sep 15, 2015
Kind
B2
Abstract

A method of dynamically adjusting quality of service targets for applications and/or subscribers of wireless communication, by reducing or increasing quality of service targets for a group of applications based on overload or under load detection, in order to ensure that actually achieved quality of service levels are adequate, especially when supporting emergency service users.

Claims (25)

1. A method of managing air interface resources in a wireless network of the kind in which subscriptions to different levels of service are available for different applications and at least a first and a second class of applications compete with each other for bandwidth resources allocated by an allocation algorithm, comprising:

receiving an indication that an overload has been detected;

in response to the received overload indication, reducing one or more QoS targets for at least one class of application being served by the wireless network, wherein each QoS target is a prescribed level of network performance to be experienced by a user if sufficient resources can be allocated; and

communicating the one or more reduced QoS targets, thereby to initiate a reallocation of dedicated air interface bandwidth resources between at least the first and second classes that brings the network performance closer to the level specified by the current QoS targets, including said reduced one or more targets.

2. The method of claim 1 , wherein the reducing step reduces the quality of service target based on an amount of the detected overload.

3. The method of claim 1 , wherein the reducing step reduces the quality of service target in proportion to an amount of the detected overload.

4. The method of claim 1 , wherein the reducing step reduces the quality of service target if the detected overload is less than a first overload threshold.

5. The method of claim 1 , wherein at least some applications have assigned QoS targets each of which must be at least a required quality of service value, and wherein the reducing step reduces the quality of service targets for a first group of applications to the pertinent required quality of service values if the detected overload is greater than a first threshold, and reduces the quality of service targets for a second group of applications based on an amount of the overload detected if the detected overload is less than the first threshold.

6. The method of claim 5 , further comprising:

dropping a third group of applications if the detected overload is greater than a second overload threshold, the second overload threshold being greater than the first overload threshold; and wherein

the reducing step reduces the quality of service targets for the first group of applications to the pertinent required quality of service values if the detected overload is greater than the first threshold and less than the second threshold.

7. The method of claim 1 , comprising:

determining a performance metric for each application; and

detecting overload based on the performance metrics.

8. The method of claim 7 , wherein the determining of a performance metric for each application is based on at least one actual performance measurement and on a poor performance bound associated with the actual performance measurement.

9. The method of claim 1 , wherein the reducing step is performed for applications in a lower priority class than at least some other applications.

10. The method of claim 9 , wherein a higher priority class of application is associated with emergency response services and a lower priority class is associated with municipal services.

11. The method of claim 1 , wherein the reducing step is performed for applications in a higher priority class after being performed for a lower priority class of applications.

12. The method of claim 1 , further comprising:

increasing quality of service targets for a further class of applications if an under load is detected.

13. The method of claim 12 , wherein the increasing step increases the quality of service targets by an amount based on an amount of under loading.

14. A method of managing air interface resources in a wireless network of the kind in which subscriptions to different levels of service are available for different applications and at least a first and a second class of applications compete with each other for bandwidth resources allocated by an allocation algorithm, comprising:

receiving an indication that an under load has been detected;

in response to the received under load indication, increasing one or more QoS targets for at least one application being served by the wireless network, wherein each QoS target is a prescribed level of network performance to be experienced by a user if sufficient resources can be allocated; and

communicating the one or more increased QoS targets, thereby to initiate a reallocation of dedicated air interface bandwidth resources between at least the first and second classes that brings the network performance closer to the level specified by the current QoS targets, including said increased one or more targets.

Assignments (4)
RELEASE OF SECURITY INTEREST Recorded Sep 30, 2014
From: CREDIT SUISSE AG
To: ALCATEL LUCENT
Reel/Frame 033868/0555 →
SECURITY AGREEMENT Recorded Jan 30, 2013
From: ALCATEL LUCENT
To: CREDIT SUISSE AG
Reel/Frame 029821/0001 →
MERGER Recorded Dec 3, 2012
From: LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES INC.
To: ALCATEL-LUCENT USA INC.
Reel/Frame 029389/0795 →
ASSIGNMENT OF ASSIGNOR'S INTEREST Recorded Mar 16, 2005
From: HANER, MARCH; HINTON, DANIELLE; KLEIN, THIERRY ETIENNE
To: LUCENT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Reel/Frame 016393/0978 →
Continuity (1)
Related Publication 20060212594A1 · Sep 21, 2006