Alim et al. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications andNetworking (2017) 2017:83
DOI 10.1186/s13638-017-0867-6

RESEARCH

Open AccessIn-band full-duplex medium access
control design for heterogeneous wireless LAN
Md. Abdul Alim1,2* , Makoto Kobayashi1 , Shunsuke Saruwatari1 and Takashi Watanabe1

Abstract
Full-duplex (FD) wireless communication is evolving into a practical technique, and many studies are being
conducting in this area, especially regarding the physical layer. However, to exploit FD benefit successfully, efficientmedium access control (MAC) protocols are crucial as well as physical layer advances. Numerous FD-MAC protocols
have been proposed, but these MAC protocols cannot address all the issues encountered in this area. In addition, many
half-duplex (HD) capable devices are present in existing wireless local area networks (WLANs), so there is an urgent
need to integrate FD clients and HD clients in the same WLAN. We refer to this type of WLAN as a heterogeneous
WLAN (Het-WLAN). In this paper, we propose an FD-MAC for Het-WLAN, which considers all possible types of FD
transmissions. Our proposed FD-MAC protocol suppresses inter-user interference. Simulation results demonstrated
that a significant throughput gain (about 96%) could be achieved by using our proposed FD-MAC compared withtraditional HD communications. Moreover, our proposed MAC obtained better performance (average throughput
gain of about 11%) compared with another existing FD-MAC design. In addition, probability analysis suggested thatthe total probability of FD transmissions increased rapidly as the WLAN approached saturation conditions.
Keywords: Full-duplex, MAC protocol, Het-WLAN, FD-MAC

1 Introduction
In general, traditional radio transceivers cannot transmit and receive simultaneously using the same frequency
band because of self-interference at the receiver end.
However, recent technological advances in antenna design
and radio frequency interference cancellation techniques
can reduce self-interference by up to 110 dB [1]. Similar
studies have also been conducted regarding the physicallayer by [2–4]. The latest technologies for self-interference
cancellation allow us to transmit and receive signals
simultaneously using the same frequency, which is known
as in-band full-duplex (IBFD) communication [5]. However, a suitable medium access control (MAC) is crucial
to exploit the full advantages of IBFD technology in wireless local area networks (WLANs) because the current
IEEE standard MAC protocols do not support IBFD communications. IBFD is one of the techniques with thegreatest potential for supporting the huge traffic demandsin the near future, and researchers are attracted to IBFD
*Correspondence: abdul.alim@ist.osaka-u.ac.jp
Department of Information Networking, Graduate School of Information
Science and Technology, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan2
ECE Discipline, Khulna University, Khulna, Bangladesh
1because it can increase the spectral efficiency without
requiring any additional frequency resources [5]. IBFD
can also double the ergodic capacity of a multiple-input
multiple-output system [1, 3].
IBFD wireless communication can be categorized as
bidirectional FD (BFD), three node FD (TNFD), or relay
FD (RFD) [5, 6]. BFD and TNFD are illustrated in Fig. 1.
Two nodes comprising the primary transmitter (PT) andprimary receiver (PR) transmit to and receive from eachother simultaneously (Fig. 1a) in BFD. TNFD can be
described as destination-based TNFD or source-based
TNFD. In destination-based TNFD, PT transmits a signal
to PR and PR also transmits a signal to another secondary
receiver (SR) while receiving data from PT (Fig. 1b). In
this case, PR also acts as a secondary transmitter (ST). In
source-based TNFD, PT transmits data to PR and ST alsotransmits data to PT (Fig. 1c). In this case, PT also acts as
a SR. However, in RFD, a user terminal sends data to thedestination using a relaying node [5]. In this study, we consider three modes of transmission, i.e., half-duplex (HD),
BFD, and TNFD.

© The Author(s). 2017 Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, andreproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to theCreative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.

Alim et al. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking (2017) 2017:83

Page 2 of 15

Fig. 1 a BFD, b destination-based TNFD, and c source-based TNFD

All of the user terminals or nodes in existing WLANs
are traditional HD capable. Therefore, it is not possible
to replace all of these HD nodes (HDNs) with FD nodes(FDNs) overnight, so it is necessary to incorporate FDNs
in existing WLANs in a manner that allows HDNs and
FDNs to operate simultaneously. A WLAN that comprises
HDNs and FDNs is referred to as a heterogeneous WLAN
(Het-WLAN) because it has different types of clients or
nodes.
In this paper, we propose an FD-MAC for Het-WLAN,
which we call HFD-MAC. The basic structure of HetWLAN is shown in Fig. 2, where the access point (AP) is
FD capable (FD-AP) and some FDNs are present as wellas HDNs. Moreover, Het-WLAN is important because
HDNs have some advantages compared with FDNs. For
example, FDNs are more expensive and they consume
more power. Therefore, some people may not like FD
devices, and they will prefer to choose HD devices to meettheir daily needs. Therefore, a suitable FD-MAC design isrequired for this type of Het-WLAN.

Fig. 2 Structure of a Het-WLAN

The symmetric length of the uplink and downlink data
traffic is considered in the design of our FD-MAC protocol. This type of traffic is very common in different areas,such as cellular mobile communications, distant healthmonitoring, online video games, peer-to-peer (P2P) TV,
P2P file sharing, and video conferencing [7]. Moreover,
IBFD wireless communications should be designed insuch a way, where the symmetric traffic length plays a vitalrole. Otherwise, the link (downlink or uplink) that finishes
its data transmission earlier will be idle for the remainderof the time of that round.
In this HFD-MAC protocol, all possible types of FD
transmission are considered. To the best of our knowledge, this is a novel research that describes the FD-MAC
for this kind of Het-WLAN, which describes all possible
transmissions. The main contributions of this research are
as follows.
• An FD-MAC is proposed for a Het-WLAN that
contains FDNs and HDNs.

Alim et al. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking (2017) 2017:83• The proposed FD-MAC considers all possible typesof FD transmissions in this Het-WLAN.
• We compared performance of our proposed
FD-MAC with traditional HD communications andanother existing FD-MAC protocol.
• A comprehensive probability analysis was performed
for the proposed HFD-MAC.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows.
In Section 2, we provide a brief description of related
research in this area. In Section 3, we present the problem
statement regarding FD-MAC. In Section 4, we explain
the proposed MAC design. In Section 5, we give a brief
description of the method for combating inter-user interference. In Section 6, we present the mathematical analysis. The results and performance analysis are given in
Section 7. In Section 8, we give our conclusions.

2 Related works
Many studies in the area of IBFD wireless communication have aimed to minimize self-interference, which are
related to the physical layer. For example, a single antenna
was used to support IBFD WiFi radio by [1], where both
analog and digital self-interference cancelation techniques
were used. Various techniques have been proposed toreduce self-interference, which are related to advancesin IBFD wireless communication in the physical layer[2, 4, 8–11].
Although several MAC designs have been proposed
for WLANs using IBFD, they do not consider all possible types of IBFD transmissions. In addition, some were
proposed for distributed wireless networks or ad hoc
networks, where all the clients were treated as FDNs
[12, 13]. An FD multi-channel MAC (FD-MMAC) was
proposed to mitigate multi-channel hidden terminal (HT)problems, which targeted for eliminating controlling signals [12]. During data transmission between two nodes,
the receiver transmits a beacon packet back-to-back until
the data transmission is complete. This beacon packet
does not contain any user data. Hence, in terms of user
data communications, the FD capability is not fully utilized in FD-MMAC. In addition, TNFD communication
is not possible because PR always needs to transmit beacon packets while receiving data from PT. Another MAC
protocol was proposed by [13] for IBFD ad-hoc networks,
where all the clients were considered as FDNs. The interuser interference is not considered during TNFD communications, and thus, TNFD communications will beaffected greatly by inter-user interference problems. The
MAC design proposed by [14] can be used in both ad hoc
and infrastructure-based WLANs. In this design, all thenodes are considered to be FD capable. Moreover, in thecase of source-based TNFD transmissions, collisions will
occur if more than two clients select the same sub-carrier

Page 3 of 15

and AP also selects that sub-carrier. Furthermore, thisMAC does not include a procedure to allow the network
allocation vector (NAV) to update the timing in different
nodes.
An infrastructure-based MAC protocol for IBFD wireless communications was proposed that includes a sharedrandom back-off mechanism [15], where all the nodes aretreated as FDNs and the nodes can switch to the HD
or FD mode based on the traffic availability. According
to this MAC, all the nodes first participate in the normal contention period, before HD transmission occurs.
Subsequently, any FD transmission (BFD or TNFD) canbe performed after the shared random back-off period.
Hence, a HD transmission should be performed earlier
before initiating an FD communication. Moreover, themethod proposed by [15] restricts TNFD transmission tothis case only, where AP wins in the shared random backoff period. A power-controlled MAC (PoCMAC) was proposed recently for IBFD WiFi networks [16]. This MAC
utilizes a contention-based receiver selection scheme tomitigate inter-user interference during FD transmissions,but only FD-AP and HD clients are considered in the
network. The AP cannot initiate any transmissions in
PoCMAC. Another FD-MAC design was proposed for a
WiFi network, where both HD and FD clients are available [17]. However, the authors limit FD communications
when a mobile node and AP have packets for each other.
An FD-MAC was proposed for a WLAN by [18], where
AP is FD capable and all the clients are traditionally HD
capable. In this method, AP and all the clients need to
calculate and update the signal-to-interference ratio map
continuously, which may increase the computational load
as well as the complexity. Transmissions always need to be
initiated by clients to establish IBFD communications. If
AP wins in the contention period, IBFD communication
cannot be established for two reasons: the clients do notsupport IBFD transmissions or the clients cannot makedecisions about which can start the TNFD transmission.
Another AP-based MAC protocol was proposed by [19],where all of the clients and AP are FD capable. This protocol has a polling-based MAC design, where AP always
needs to initiate the transmission. However, the control
frame formats were not described clearly in this MAC
design.
Other studies have considered different issues on IBFD
communications, such as relay transmissions or power
control-based FD [20–22], but they did not consider the
MAC design.

3 Problem statement
The hidden and exposed terminal problems are notso significant when the network is considered to be
an AP-based WLAN and communication is performed
using a request-to-send (RTS) and clear-to-send (CTS)Alim et al. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking (2017) 2017:83

handshake mechanism. This is because all the clients in a
WLAN can update their NAVs by using the control framestransmitted by AP.
However, inter-user interference is a major issue in FDWLAN. The inter-user interference problem is illustrated
in Fig. 3. As shown in the figure, node A sends an RTS to
the AP (FD capable) first and, then, the AP makes a decision to send data to node D while also receiving data fromnode A. If nodes A and D are close to each other, the packets from node A will interfere with the packets sent by
the AP to node D, thereby producing inter-user interference problems. Node A and the AP are regarded as PT and
PR, respectively. However, node D and the AP are treatedas SR and ST, respectively. Therefore, AP acts as both PR
and ST. Without taking appropriate steps to mitigate thisinter-user interference, IBFD communications cannot be
performed perfectly.

4 Proposed MAC protocol: HFD-MAC

Page 4 of 15

4.2 Possible FD transmission in Het-WLAN

HFD-MAC is proposed for a Het-WLAN, which comprises an FD-AP, FDNs, and HDNs (Fig. 2). All possible
cases of FD transmissions are summarized in the following two main cases.
1. Case 1: TNFD communications(i) AP initiates the transmission(ii) Any HDN initiates the transmission(iii) Any FDN initiates the transmission
2. Case 2: BFD communications
In HFD-MAC, the TNFD communication is performed
between the AP and two other nodes, which can be an
HDN or FDN. The BFD communication is performed
between the AP and an FDN when they have data for eachother. However, HD transmissions may also occur in the
proposed MAC.

4.1 New control frames

A number of control frames are used in HFD-MAC protocol, where some are the same as those in the IEEE 802.11
standards, such as RTS, CTS, and acknowledgement(ACK). However, some new control frames are introducedin this HFD-MAC, as shown in Fig. 4, e.g., RTS with
duplexing indicator (RTSD) and CTS with duplexing indicator (CTSD). The duplexing indicator (DI) is a two-bit
value, which is appended to the normal RTS and CTS toobtain RTSD and CTSD, respectively, thereby facilitating
FD transmissions. A description of the DI value is given
in Table 1. FDNs always use RTSD and CTSD, whereas
HDNs use RTS and CTS. In addition, AP uses RTSD and
CTSD to communicate with FDNs. AP also uses RTS andCTS, if it communicates with HDNs. Another two control
frames called new-CTS (NCTS) and notification with DIvalue (NDI) are transmitted only by AP. The transmission(Tx) capabilities of the control frames are summarized inTable 2, where “circles” and “crosses” indicate capability
and incapability, respectively.

Fig. 3 Inter-user interference in FD-WLAN

4.3 Description of the proposed HFD-MAC

The working principle of this HFD-MAC is based on the
distributed coordination function (DCF) in IEEE 802.11.
This protocol uses CSMA/CA and a back-off mechanism
to access the channel and to avoid collisions. For simplicity, the DCF interframe space (DIFS) time and back-offtime are not shown in the figures, but the short interframe
space (SIFS) time is shown by “S” in all of the figures.
In this MAC, a node ignores collisions or the receptionof erroneous packets during the NAV period. Moreover,
it is assumed that FDNs can perform self-interference
cancelation perfectly.
According to the IEEE 802.11 standard, a number ofmanagement frames are exchanged between the AP and
nodes when nodes or devices join the WLAN [23]. For
example, after exchanging the prob request and response,
the AP grants access to the device if the device can satisfy the authentication and association procedure. Some
optional bits in these management frames can be usedby the nodes to indicate their FD capabilities. For example, during the joining process, a node moves to theassociation phase after the authentication procedure andan association request is sent to the AP. The node canindicate its FD capability using this association request
because several optional bits are available. Therefore, theAP can determine which MAC address has an FD capability and which has an HD capability. Hence, the AP sends
an RTSD to the FDN and an RTS to the HDN. In addition, RTS and RTSD are transmitted by HDNs and FDNs,
respectively.
The description of this MAC protocol is given below for
the cases mentioned above.

Alim et al. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking (2017) 2017:83

Page 5 of 15

Fig. 4 Control frame format

4.3.1 Case 1: TNFD communications(i) AP initiates the transmission
The AP initiates the transmission if it wins the contention period. If the AP has data for a HDN, it sends
an RTS to the corresponding HDN. For example, the AP
sends an RTS to a HDN (A) and A sends a CTS to AP, as
shown in Fig. 5. If another node (HDN/FDN) then wants
to send data to AP, it needs to satisfy secondary data transmission condition (SDTC)-1: “After receiving RTS from
AP, ST cannot hear the CTS from A." AP sends the RTS, so
all the nodes know that AP can receive data from anothernode. Hence, after hearing an RTS from AP, all the othernodes (HDN and/or FDN) that want to send data to AP
must wait for a time (SIFS+CTS). During this time, thenodes that have data to send AP and that cannot hear
A’s CTS stop their NAVs and start their self-timers. The
timer sets a random time within a maximum limit and thetimer decreases its value. The node with the timer thatstops first starts to send data to AP. As shown in Fig. 5,
B’s timer stops first and it starts to send data to AP. Before
sending data to AP, the node (B) senses whether the channel is busy or not. Thus, other nodes (which started theirself-timers) will stop their timers sequentially and resume
their NAVs. Immediately after receiving data from ST, AP
starts to transmit data to A. The corresponding receivers
transmit ACKs after the data transmission.

In addition, AP sends an RTSD to an FDN if it has data
for the FDN. AP always sends an RTSD to an FDN witha DI value of 11. Hence, all nodes are informed that AP
wants to transmit and receive simultaneously. Supposethat AP has sent an RTSD to a FDN (E) with a DI value of
11 and E has no data to send AP (Fig. 6). In this case, E will
send a CTSD with a DI value of 01, which means that E canonly receive but cannot transmit because it has no data for
AP. AP can receive data from another node, so it transmits an NDI, where the DI value is 10. This means that
AP will only transmit, and thus, other nodes can send data
to AP. Based on this NDI, other nodes will be informedthat AP can only transmit because it transmitted an RTSD
earlier. Therefore, the nodes that want to send data to AP
need to satisfy condition SDTC-2: “After hearing an RTSD
from AP, ST cannot hear a CTSD from E but it can hearan NDI." The nodes that satisfy SDTC-2 and that want tosend data to AP will stop their NAVs and start their selftimers. Suppose that B and C have data to send and theysatisfy SDTC-2. As shown in Fig. 6, they start their selftimers after stopping their NAVs. If we suppose that B’s
timer expires first, then it will send data after sensing thechannel as idle. Immediately after receiving data from B,

Table 2 Control frames’ transmission capability
Control frameTx capability
AP

FDN

HDN
×

Table 1 Description of duplexing indicator

RTSD





Value of DI

Meaning of DI

CTSD





×

00

Not used

RTS



×



01

Sender can Rx only

CTS



×



10

Sender can Tx only

NCTS



×

×

11

Sender can Tx and Rx simultaneously

NDI



×

×

Alim et al. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking (2017) 2017:83

Page 6 of 15

Fig. 5 AP initiates the transmission to HDN

AP starts transmission to E. In addition, C will stop thetimer and resume its NAV. All of the other nodes (A, D,
and F) will update their NAVs using the NDI and the ACKs
are transmitted accordingly.
(ii) Any HDN initiates the transmission
An HDN initiates the transmission by sending an RTS
to AP if the HDN wins the contention period for the channel access. According to Fig. 7, after receiving an RTS
from a HDN (where the HDN is node A), AP may havedata to send to another node, which may be another HDN
or an FDN. In this case, if we suppose that AP wants tosend data to an SR (B), then AP will mention the addressof B in the SR address (SRA) of its reply in a new-CTS(NCTS), as shown in Fig. 4. The NCTS will inform both
A and B about their data exchange information. Node A
updates its NAV after receiving the NCTS. After receiving the NCTS from AP, B replies by sending another CTS
to AP based on SDTC-3: “SR can only hear the NCTS but
not the RTS from A.” If SDTC-3 is satisfied by B, then it
sends a CTS to AP. The data transmission then occurs asshown in Fig. 7. After the data transmission, ACKs are

Fig. 6 AP initiates the transmission to FDN

sent simultaneously. However, if AP does not receive the
CTS from SR, it receives data from A after finishing the
SIFS and CTS time allocated to B. Other nodes update
their NAV times according to the time defined by thecontrol frames.
(iii) Any FDN initiates the transmission
After winning in the contention period, an FDN initiates a transmission by sending an RTSD to AP with a DI
value of 11. AP does not have data to send the corresponding FDN, and thus, it is a TNFD communication.
However, AP has data for another node (may be another
FDN or any HDN). Hence, AP transmits an NCTS. The
subsequent procedure is the same as that described in theprevious subsection for case 1 (ii). Therefore, sending an
NCTS after receiving an RTSD from AP indicates that AP
has data for another node.
4.3.2 Case 2: BFD communications

BFD transmission occurs between AP and one FDN when
they have data for each other. In this case, either AP or an
FDN wins in the contention period and sends an RTSD.

Alim et al. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking (2017) 2017:83

Page 7 of 15

Fig. 7 A HDN initiates the transmission

For example, AP sends an RTSD with a DI value of 11 toan FDN. The corresponding FDN also sends a CTSD witha DI value of 11 because the FDN has data for AP. BFD
transmission then occurs.
It should be noted that an RTSD is always sent with a
DI value of 11. The corresponding data transmission may
be BFD, TNFD, or HD, which depends on the reply of the
CTSD and other control frames.

5 Combating inter-user interference
Our proposed MAC for Het-WLAN suppresses inter-userinterference using the following three SDTCs.
• SDTC-1: “An ST can hear an RTS from AP but
cannot hear the corresponding CTS from PR.”• SDTC-2: “An ST can hear an RTSD from AP andcannot hear the corresponding CTSD from PR, but
can hear the NDI from AP.”• SDTC-3: “An SR cannot hear an RTS/RTSD from thePT but can hear the corresponding NCTS from AP.”
SDTC-1 is applied to TNFD communication where AP
initiates the transmission to a HDN. Similarly, SDTC-2 isFig. 8 SDTC-3: this is satisfied by B; however, it is not satisfied by C

applied in the case of TNFD where AP initiates the transmission to an FDN. Thus, after initiating the transmission
by the AP to a FDN, if an ST wants to send data to theAP, the ST needs to satisfy SDTC-2, i.e., if the ST has
data to send to AP and satisfies SDTC-2, it stops its NAV
and starts the self-timer, and the corresponding procedures occur for the TNFD communication, as describedin the previous section. In addition, SDTC-3 is used in
the case where an HDN/FDN initiates the TNFD communication. These FD-MAC mechanisms prevent inter-userinterference during TNFD communications.
For example, as shown in Fig. 8, node A (PT) sends an
RTS to AP, which is heard by node C, but it is not heard
by B. Next, AP sends an NCTS to A and B because AP
wants to send data to B, which is now an SR. In this case,
B will send a CTS because it has satisfied SDTC-3. If B
cannot satisfy the condition, B will not send the CTS and
it becomes an HD transmission. If the conditions are notmaintained by SRs and STs, inter-user interference occurs
among the user terminals during TNFD communications.
Thus, TNFD communications will sometimes fail due todata collision.

Alim et al. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking (2017) 2017:83

6 Mathematical analysis
In this section, we derive the probability equations fordifferent transmissions. The probability equations for different types of communication (BFD, TNFD, and HD)
are derived by using the packet arrival rate (PAR) at AP
for the nodes and the packet generation rate (PGR) by
clients or nodes. It is assumed that a percentage (γ ) of
total nodes act as HTs. Satisfying SDTC is a key factor that
affects the performance of TNFD communications, andit depends on the number of HTs. Therefore, we considered HTs when deriving the equations. The descriptionsof different symbols and variables in the equations are
given in Table 3. All packet arrivals are assumed to follow
a Poisson process, and we assume that the system has thecharacteristics of the M/M/1 system model.
The PAR at AP from the Internet to all clients is
λAP = mλAPH + nλAPF

Page 8 of 15

the conditional probability of that packet arriving from anH. During any data transmission, the packets
HDN is λmλTotal
may still arrive at nodes or AP. However, the nodes differ to start the transmission because the channel is busy.
Therefore, we need to know the average waiting time (Tw )for a packet in the queue, which can be derived as follows:
arrivalrate
servicerate × (servicerate − arrivalrate)
λTotal,=μ(μ − λTotal )

Tw =

(3)

where μ is the average service rate of AP.
The probability analysis is described in the following
subsections.

(1)
6.1 BFD communications

To derive the probability of bidirectional FD communications (PBFD ), we present Lemmas 1 and 2.

The total PAR at AP from the Internet and clients is
λTotal = λAP + mλH + nλF(2)

If one packet arrives at AP from the Internet, the conditional probability of that packet arriving at AP for an
APF
FDN is nλλTotal and the conditional probability of that packet
APH
arriving for an HDN is mλλTotal . Similarly, if a packet arrivesat AP from a node, the conditional probability of thatF
andpacket arriving from an FDN can be defined as λnλ
Total

Table 3 Declaration of variables
Variables

Explanationm

Number of HDNsn

Number of FDNsγ

Percentage of total nodes as hidden terminals

λAP

Packet arrival rate at AP for all clients (packets/s)

λAPH

Packet arrival rate at AP for each HDN (packets/s)

λAPF

Packet arrival rate at AP for each FDN (packets/s)

λH

Packet generating rate by each HDN for AP (packets/s)

λF

Packet generating rate by each FDN for AP (packets/s)

PBFD

Probability of bidirectional FD communication

PTNFD

Probability of TNFD communication

PHD

Probability of HD communication

TRTS

Time for RTS

TCTSTime for CTS

TRTSD

Time for RTSD

TCTSD

Time for CTSD

TSIFSTime for SIFS

TNDI

Time for NDI

Lemma 1 After sending an RTSD to an FDN by the AP,
BFD will occur only if the corresponding FDN also has data
to send to the AP.
Proof To calculate the probability of BFD occurring
when AP initiates the transmission to a FDN, we need to
calculate the following two probabilities. (a) The conditional probability that the packet arriving at AP is for an
APF
FDN, which is nλλTotal . (b) The probability that the corresponding FDN also has a packet to send to the AP within
the time T1 , where T1 = TRTSD + TSIFS + Tw . The probability that the FDN
 one packet to send to AP has at least
within time T1 is 1 − e−λF T1 . By multiplying (a) and (b),we can calculate the probability of BFD occurring in thiscase.
Lemma 2 After sending an RTSD to the AP by an FDN,
BFD will occur only if the AP also has data to send to thecorresponding FDN.
Proof To calculate the probability of BFD occurring
when an FDN initiates the transmission, we need to calculate the following two probabilities. (a) The conditional
probability that the packet arriving at AP is sent by anF. (b) The probability that AP also has a
FDN, which is λnλTotal
packet to send to FDN within the time T1 . The probability
that AP has at least one packet
to send to the correspond
ing FDN within time T1 is 1−e−λAPF T1 . By mltiplying (a)and (b), we can calculate the probability of BFD occurringin this case.

Alim et al. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking (2017) 2017:83

By using Lemmas 1 and 2, we can derive an equation
to calculate the probability of BFD occurring (PBFD ), as
follows.
PBFD =

nλAPF 1 − e−λF T1
λTotalnλF 
1 − e−λAPF T1+
λTotal(4)

6.2 TNFD communications

To derive the probability of the TNFD communication(PTNFD ), we present Lemmas 3–6 as follows.
Lemma 3 After initiating the transmission by a HDN to
the AP, TNFD communications will occur only if AP also
has data to send to any other node that cannot hear the
RTS from the HDN.
Proof To calculate the probability of TNFD occurring in
the case when an HDN initiates the communication, we
need to calculate the following two probabilities. (a) The
conditional probability that the packet arriving at AP isH. (b) The probability thatsent by an HDN, which is λmλTotal
AP also has a packet to send to any other node that cannot
hear the RTS from the HDN within time T2 , where T2 =TRTS + TSIFS + Tw . The probability that AP has at leastone
nodes within time T2 is packet for one of the hidden
1 − e−{(m−1)λAPH +nλAPF }T2 γ . By multiplying (a) and (b),we can calculate the probability of TNFD occurring in thiscase.
Lemma 4 After initiating the transmission by a FDN to
the AP, TNFD communications will occur only if (i) the AP
has no data for the corresponding FDN and (ii) the AP has
data for another node that cannot hear the RTSD from the
FDN.
Proof To calculate the probability of TNFD occurring inthis case, we need to calculate the following three probabilities. (a) The conditional probability that an FDN has
F. (b) The probabila packet to send to AP, which is λnλTotal
ity that AP has no data to sendtothecorrespondingFDNwithin time T1 , which is e−λAPF T1 . (c) The probability
that the AP has a packet for another node that cannot
hear the RTSD from the FDN
within time T1 , which is
1 − e−{mλAPH +(n−1)λAPF }T1 γ . We can calculate the probability of TNFD communications occurring in this case bymultiplying (a), (b), and (c).
Lemma 5 After initiating the transmission by the AP toa HDN, TNFD communications will occur only if anothernode that cannot hear the RTS has data to send to AP.

Page 9 of 15

Proof To calculate this probability, we need to calculate the following two probabilities. (a) The conditional
probability that the AP has a packet to send a HDN, which
APH
is mλ
λTotal . (b) The probability that any other node thatcannot hear the RTS has packets for the AP within time
T3 , where, T3 = TRTS + TSIFS+ TCTS + Tw . This probabil
ity can be written as T3 is 1 − e−{(m−1)λH +nλF }γ T3 . By
multiplying (a) and (b), we can calculate the probability of
TNFD occurring in this case.
Lemma 6 After initiating the transmission by the AP toa FDN, TNFD will occur only if (i) the corresponding FDN
has no data to send to the AP and (ii) any other node thatcannot hear the RTSD has data for the AP.
Proof To calculate the probability of TNFD communications occurring in this case, we need to calculate thefollowing three probabilities. (a) The conditional probability that the AP has a packet to send to an FDN, which
APF
is nλ
λTotal . (b) The probability that the corresponding FDN
has no data
to send to the AP within time T1 , which ise−λF T1 . (c) The probability that any other node that cannot hear the RTSD has data for the AP within time T4 ,where T4 = TRTSD +2TSIFS
 prob +TCTSD +TNDI +Tw . Thisability is calculated as 1 − e−{mλH +(n−1)λF }γ T4 . We cancalculate the probability of TNFD occurring in this caseby multiplying (a), (b), and (c).
By using Lemmas 3–6, we can derive an equation for
calculating the probability of TNFD occurring (PTNFD ):PTNFD =

mλH 
1 − e−{(m−1)λAPH +nλAPF }T2 γ
λTotalnλF  −λAPF T1  e
1 − e−{mλAPH +(n−1)λAPF }T1 γ+
λTotalmλAPH 1 − e−{(m−1)λH +nλF }γ T3+λTotal
nλAPF  −λF T1  e
1 − e−{mλH +(n−1)λF }γ T4+
λTotal(5)

6.3 HD communications

To derive the probability of HD communication (PHD ),Lemmas 7–10 are presented as follows.
Lemma 7 After initiating the transmission by a HDN,
HD communications will occur if (i) AP has no data tosend any other node or (ii) AP has data to send to anothernode that is exposed to the corresponding HDN. Because
although the AP has data for the nodes that are exposedto the corresponding HDN, the SDTC-3 cannot be satisfied,
and thus, a HD communication will occur.

Alim et al. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking (2017) 2017:83

Proof To calculate the probability of HD communications occurring in this case, we need to calculate the following probabilities. (a) The conditional probability thatthe HDN initiates a transmission and the probability that
the AP has no data to send to othernodes within time−{(m−1)λAPH +nλAPF }T2 .
HeT2 , which is calculated as λmλTotal(b) The probability that the HDN initiates the transmission and the AP has at least one packet for the nodesthatH
are exposed to the HDN, which is calculated as λmλ
1−
Total


e−{(m−1)λAPH +nλAPF }T2 1 − γ .
By adding (a) and (b), we can calculate the probability of
HD communications occurring in this case.
Lemma 8 After initiating the transmission by an FDN,
HD communications will occur if (i) The AP has no data tosend to any other node including the corresponding FDN or(ii) The AP has data to send to another node that is exposedto the corresponding FDN. SDTC-3 cannot be satisfied so
HD communications will occur in this case.
Proof To calculate the probability of HD communications occurring in this case, we need to calculate thefollowing probabilities. (a) The conditional probability
that the FDN initiates the transmission and the probability that the AP has no data to send to other nodes,
including the FDN,
 within time T1 , which is calculated
nλF
−λ
T
1
AP
. (b) The probability that after initias λTotal e
ating the transmission by a FDN, the AP has no data
for the corresponding FDN and the AP has at least
one packet for the nodes that are exposed
FDN to the
nλF
−λ
T
1
APF
1−
within time T1 , which is calculated as λTotal ee−{mλAPH +(n−1)λAPF }T1 1 − γ . By adding (a) and (b),we can calculate the probability of HD communications
occurring when an FDN initiates the transmission.
Lemma 9 After initiating the transmission by the AP toan HDN, HD communications will occur if other nodes
that cannot hear the RTS have no data for AP.
Proof To calculate the probability of HD communications occurring in this case, we need to calculate thefollowing two probabilities. (a) The conditional probability that the AP has a packet to send to an HDN, which
APH
is mλ
λTotal . (b) The probability that other nodes that satisfy
SDTC-1 have no data for the AP withintime T3 , which−{(m−1)λ
+nλ
}γ
T
H
3
F
. By multiplying (a)is calculated as eand (b), we obtain the probability of HD communications
occurring in this case.
Lemma 10 After initiating the transmission by the AP
to an FDN, HD communications will occur if (i) the

Page 10 of 15

corresponding FDN has no data for the AP and (ii) othernodes that cannot hear the RTSD have no data for the AP.
Proof To calculate the probability of occurring HD inthis case, we need to calculate the following three probabilities. (a) The conditional probability that the AP has a
APF
packet to send to an FDN, which is nλλTotal . (b) The probability that the corresponding FDN has nodata to send to
the AP within time T1 , which is e−λF T1 . (c) The probability that other nodes that cannot hear the RTSD haveno data for the AP within
 time T4 , which can be written
as e−{mλH +(n−1)λF }γ T4 . By multiplying (a), (b), and (c),we can calculate the probability of HD communications
occurring in this case.
By using Lemmas 7–10, the equation for calculating theprobability of HD communication occurring (PHD ) can bederived as follows.
PHD =mλH  −{(m−1)λAPH +nλAPF }T2 eλTotalmλH +
1 − e−{(m−1)λAPH +nλAPF }T2 (1 − γ )λTotalnλF  −λAP T1 +eλTotalnλF  −λAPF T1  +e
1 − e−{mλAPH +(n−1)λAPF }T1 (1 − γ )λTotalmλAPH  −{(m−1)λH +nλF }γ T3 +eλTotal
nλAPF −λF T1   −{mλH +(n−1)λF }γ T4 ee+λTotal(6)
Furthermore, the probability equations should satisfy
the following condition:
PBFD + PTNFD + PHD = 1(7)

7 Result and performance analysis
Simulations were performed in MATLAB to analyze theperformance of the proposed HFD-MAC. The performance analysis for HFD-MAC is presented in the following two subsections in terms of the probability analysis
and throughput analysis.
7.1 Probability analysis

The probability analysis was performed in unsaturated
conditions, where every node did not have data to send at
all times. By contrast, in saturation conditions, all clientsand the AP always have packets to transmit [24]. The saturation condition represents the maximum load in a stablecondition, i.e., the queue for arriving packets is assumed
to always be nonempty for each node in the network.
The probability analysis results for BFD, TNFD, and HD
transmissions in the proposed HFD-MAC relative to theAlim et al. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking (2017) 2017:83

downlink PAR (from AP to nodes) are shown in Fig. 9.
The PGRs by each HDN and FDN were 20 and 25 packets/s, respectively, and the numbers of HDNs and FDNs
were both 10 (fixed). The PGR was higher for FDNs than
HDNs because FDNs can handle more data than HDNs.
The downlink PAR at AP for each node was varied from 5
to 65 packets/s, as shown in Fig. 9. The packet arrival ratecannot be increased more than 65 packets/s for this simulation parameters because the utilization factor becomes
higher than 100%, which is a unstable condition. The maximum utilization factor in this case was about 94%, i.e., theutilization factor was about 94% when the average PAR at
AP for each node was 65 packets/s.
The simulation results in Fig. 9 show that the probability of HD communications decreased significantly as PAR
increased at AP for each node, whereas PTNFD increased
significantly as PAR increased for each node. Moreover,
PBFD also increased. Thus, the total probability of FD
communications (PTNFD + PBFD ) increased significantly.
Moreover, the figures present the effects of HTs on theprobability of different communications. As shown in the
figures, it is observed that the higher percentage of HTs in
the network had higher probability of FD communications
and lower probability of HD communications as compared between two sub-figures in Fig. 9. However, evenwith a small percentage of HTs (10% of total nodes), the
HFD-MAC provided about 70% FD communications outof all possible communications in saturation conditions(Fig. 9a).
The probability analysis results according to the total
number of nodes are shown in Fig. 10, where the PGRs andPARs were the same as those used in the previous analysis,i.e., 20 and 25 packets/s for HDNs and FDNs, respectively.
In this simulation, 50% of total nodes were FDNs and 50%
were HDNs always. The results in this figure exhibit a similar trend to those in the previous figure. The total probability of FD communications (PTNFD + PBFD ) increased
greatly as the number of nodes increased whereas the

Page 11 of 15

probability of HD communications decreased. The maximum utilization factor in this case was about 97%, i.e.,
the utilization factor was about 97% if the total number ofnodes was 40. The results in Fig. 10 also depicts the effectsof HTs on the probability of different types of communications in HFD-MAC. From this figure, it is observedthat the probability of TNFD decreased with the increaseof nodes’ number, when the nodes’ number was higher
than 36 (Fig. 10b). PHD continued to decrease and PBFD
continued to increase.
Based on this probability analysis, it is observed thatthe probability of FD communications (PTNFD and PBFD )increased significantly and the probability of HD communications decreased substantially as the system moved
toward the saturation condition from an unsaturated
condition. FD communications could not always be performed under saturation conditions because the SDTC
was not always satisfied when HDNs initiated the transmission. In addition, the figures show that the sum of all
the probabilities (PTNFD , PBFD , and PHD ) always equals 1,
thereby validating the derivation of the equations.
7.2 Throughput analysis

An extensive simulation was performed in MATLAB
to analyze the throughput of our proposed HFD-MAC
under saturation conditions. The simulation parameters
are given in Table 4. The simulation results are shown in
Fig. 12. HFD-MAC was compared with an existing FDMAC [17] and the traditional HD with RTS/CTS. We
compared HFD-MAC with the existing FD-MAC because
it also works in Het-WLANs. However, FD communications were limited only to cases where the AP and other
FDNs had packets for each other [17].
We assumed that the reception of any control frameand data is successful if the receiving node lies within
the range of the transmitter. A typical topology for an
AP-based WLAN was considered for this simulation, as
shown in Fig. 11. As mentioned earlier, satisfying the

Fig. 9 Probability vs. downlink packet arrival rate at the AP. a Average HT ratio is 10%. b Average HT ratio is 30%

Alim et al. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking (2017) 2017:83

Page 12 of 15

Fig. 10 Probability vs. total number of nodes. a Average HT ratio is 10%. b Average HT ratio is 30%

SDTCs is crucial for performing TNFD communicationsin HFD-MAC. Moreover, satisfying SDTC depends on the
topology, where some hidden nodes exist. A WLAN was
considered in this simulation with 30% hidden nodes onan average. For example, as shown in Fig. 11, if node B
is a PT, then node E and D cannot hear the signal transmitted from B, i.e., E and D are HTs with respect to node
B. Similarly, node F is the HT with respect to node C.
Therefore, if B initiates the transmissions, E or D can participate in TNFD communications because they satisfy the
SDTC. Similarly, if C initiates the transmissions, only F
can participate in the TNFD communications.
As shown the Fig. 12, there were two FDNs and
HDNs initially, and each number was then increasedby two, whereas only one AP was considered. In thissimulation, we used 10 samples as the throughput witheach different number of nodes and then calculated theaverage throughput, as shown in Fig. 12. The results
show that the mean average throughput with HFD-MAC
was 55.17 Mbps, whereas the values were 28.12 and49.69 Mbps for the traditional HD and existing FD-MAC[17], respectively. Thus, the mean average throughput
increased by 96.19 and 11.03% using our proposed MAC
compared with the traditional HD and existing FD-MAC,
respectively.
In this simulation, we considered that about 30% of
total nodes were hidden when a particular node was considered. Satisfying the SDTC depends on the number ofhidden nodes in the network. The throughput with HFDMAC was lower than that using the existing FD-MAC
when the number of nodes was less than 10 because theSDTC cannot always be satisfied if the number of nodes

Table 4 Simulation parameter
Packet payload (data)

2000 bytes

RTS

20 bytesCTS

14 bytes

RTSD

20.25 bytes

CTSD

14.25 bytes

ACK

14 bytes

NDI

14.25 bytes

Data rate

54 Mbps

Control frame (RTS, CTS, etc.) rate

6 Mbps

DIFS time

34 μs

SIFS time

16 μs

Slot time

9 μs

Minimum backoff window size (CWmin )15

PLCP preamble duration

16 μs

PLCP header duration

4 μs

Maximum time of self-timer

50 μs

Fig. 11 Typical topology of a WLAN that consists of hidden terminals

Alim et al. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking (2017) 2017:83

60

Average throughput (Mbps)

55
50
45
40
35
30
25
Proposed HFD-MAC
Existing FD-MAC [17]Traditional HD with RTS/CTS
Analytical throughput

20
15
10
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

Number of nodes

Fig. 12 Average throughput with respect to number of nodes

is lower. However, this SDTC condition is not requiredby the FD-MAC proposed by [17]. Hence, either BFD
or HD communication occurred when using FD-MAC.
Therefore, the average throughput was higher using FDMAC than the proposed HFD-MAC when the number ofnodes was less than 10. In addition, the average throughput decreased with FD-MAC [17] when the number ofnodes increased. When the number of nodes increased,
BFD communications did not increase as much compared with TNFD communications. Therefore, the average throughput decreased with FD-MAC ([17]) because
TNFD communications were not considered here. However, the probability of HD communications decreased
greatly whereas that of TNFD increased significantly as
the number of nodes increased, and thus, the averagethroughput increased in our proposed HFD-MAC.
Some differences are observed between the simulation
throughput and the throughput that is calculated analytically as in Fig. 12. The reason is that the percentage ofhidden terminals are fixed in the mathematical derivations. However, there are some variations of this number
in different network topology in the simulation. Moreover, the contention period for channel access may varyin simulations, and thus, the exact time of the transmission also changes. On the other hand, a fixed averagetransmission time is assumed in the mathematical analysis. Therefore, some variations are observed between
the simulation throughput and the analytical throughput.
The mean average throughput is achieved by the simulation and the mean analytical throughput are 55.17 and54.29 Mbps, respectively, which are very close to eachother.
The average HT ratio is considered as 30% for the simulation in Fig. 12. This consideration is clarified by thefollowing discussion. The MAC design is proposed for

an infrastructure-based WLAN by using the game theory[25]. The authors evaluated the performance in the presence of HT and consider the percentage of HT from 10
to 60% [25]. The performance of IEEE 802.11 DCF is analyzed in the presence of HT, where the HT ratio is varied
from about 5 to 60% [26]. The effect of HT on the performance of MAC protocol based on IEEE 802.11 standard
are analyzed in [27]. The authors considered the HT ratio
from 10 to 30% in that paper. The average HT ratio inpractical radio environment can vary depending on various parameters, such as network topology, line of sight,
and transmitting power or range. Therefore, we chose theaverage HT ratio as 30% for this simulation in Fig. 12.
The performance of HFD-MAC in terms of average
HT ratio for 25 nodes is shown in Fig. 13, which is performed in saturation conditions. As shown in the figure,the throughput of HFD-MAC increases as the average HT
ratio increases. The SDTC conditions cannot be satisfied
in most of the cases for the lower average HT ratio. However, the SDTC conditions are satisfied in most of thecases for higher average HT ratio and thus throughput
increases. On the other hand, the throughput of existing
FD-MAC [17] remains the same with the increase of average HT ratio, as there is no effect of HT on the throughput
for that MAC protocol.
Further results are shown in Fig. 14 with 20 nodes,
which compares the achievable maximum, average, andminimum throughput under saturation conditions. It isobserved that the maximum achievable throughputs using
our proposed HFD-MAC and the existing FD-MAC were
almost the same at about 63 Mbps, whereas the value
was 32.61 Mbps with traditional HD. Hence, the maximum achievable throughput gain using our HFD-MAC
was about 93.19% compared with HD communication.
However, the gains in the average throughput were 96 and80
70

Average throughput (Mbps)

65Page 13 of 15

Proposed HFD-MAC
Existing FD-MAC [17]

60
50
40
30
20
10
0
5%

15%

25%

35%

45%

55%

Average HT ratio

Fig. 13 Average throughput with respect to average HT ratioAlim et al. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking (2017) 2017:83

Page 14 of 15

Fig. 14 Throughput comparison for 20 nodes

11% comparing to the traditional HD and FD-MAC [17],respectively. On the other hand, HFD-MAC achieved thelowest throughput in case of the minimum throughput
comparison. This happened in some rare cases in saturation conditions, when the TNFD was initiated only by
a HDN and the SDTC was not satisfied, and thus, HD
communications occurred. However in all other cases of
TNFD, BFD communications occurred in saturation conditions. Moreover, as FD communications (either BFD or
TNFD) occurred in most of times in saturation conditions,higher throughput was achieved by using the proposed
HFD-MAC.
The MAC design for this kind of Het-WLAN is very
important, as the coexistence of HDNs and FDNs in thesame WLAN will be inevitable in near future. Some FDMAC were proposed, where FDNs can switch between
FD and HD mode [14, 15]. However, this is not sufficientbecause there are some differences in terms of MAC protocols between the WLAN that consists of only FDNs andthe WLAN that contains both HDNs and FDNs. Although
the FDN can switch between FD and HD mode, it depends
on the packet availability and also on the response of therespective FDN (type 1). However, it is fixed that the HDN
always performs HD transmission, which does not dependon packets arrival rate (type 2). The decision in type 1 istaken by the node and the AP acts accordingly. However,the decision in type 2 is always fixed, and the AP takes
decision without getting any feedback from the HDN.
Therefore, different MAC protocols are required for thesetwo kinds of networks.

8 Conclusions
In this paper, we proposed an FD-MAC protocol for
the Het-WLAN, which comprises FDNs, HDNs, and an
FD-AP. In our proposed HFD-MAC, all possible FDtransmissions were considered in Het-WLANs. This protocol minimizes the inter-user interference during FDtransmissions by using SDTCs. The simulation results
showed that HFD-MAC increased the overall throughput significantly compared with that using traditional HD
transmissions. In addition, the performance of HFD-MAC
protocol was better than that of another existing FDMAC. The probability analysis results suggested that the
total probability of IBFD transmission increased significantly as the WLAN approached saturation conditions.
This type of FD-MAC may be very important for supporting high-speed FD-WLANs in the near future.
Acknowledgements
This research and development work was supported by the MIC/SCOPE #
155007006. This work was also supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number
JP16H01718.
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Publisher’s NoteSpringer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims inpublished maps and institutional affiliations.
Received: 1 July 2016 Accepted: 19 April 2017

References
1. D Bharadia, E McMilin, S Katti, Full duplex radios. ACM SIGCOMM Comput.
Commun. Rev. 43(4), 375–386 (2013)
2. JI Choi, M Jain, K Srinivasan, P Levis, S Katti, in Proc. of the Sixteenth Annual
International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking. Achieving
single channel, full duplex wireless communication (ACM, Chicago, 2010),
pp. 1–12
3. D Bharadia, S Katti, in Proc. of 11th USENIX Symposium on Networked
Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI 14). Full duplex MIMO radios,(Seattle, 2014), pp. 359–372
4. M Jain, JI Choi, T Kim, D Bharadia, S Seth, K Srinivasan, P Levis, S Katti, P
Sinha, in Proc. of the 17th Annual International Conference on Mobile
Computing and Networking (MobiCom). Practical, real-time, full duplex
wireless (ACM, Las Vegas, 2011), pp. 301–312
5. D Kim, H Lee, D Hong, A survey of in-band full-duplex transmission: fromthe perspective of PHY and MAC layers. IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials.
17(4), 2017–2046 (2015)

Alim et al. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking (2017) 2017:83

6.

7.
8.

9.

10.
11.

12.

13.

14.

15.
16.

17.

18.

19.
20.

21.

22.

23.

24.
25.

26.

27.

KM Thilina, H Tabassum, E Hossain, DI Kim, Medium access control designfor full duplex wireless systems: challenges and approaches. IEEE
Commun. Mag. 53(5), 112–120 (2015)
Literature on asymmetry of the working document, SE19(13)49 Annex 5,2013 (2013). http://cept.org/documents/se-19/10171/se19
E Everett, M Duarte, C Dick, A Sabharwal, in Proc. of the Forty Fifth Asilomar
Conference on Signals, Systems and Computers (ASILOMAR). Empowering
full-duplex wireless communication by exploiting directional diversity(IEEE, Pacific Grove, 2011), pp. 2002–2006
M Duarte, A Sabharwal, in Proc. of the Forty Fourth Asilomar Conference on
Signals, Systems and Computers. Full-duplex wireless communications
using off-the-shelf radios: feasibility and first results (IEEE, Pacific Grove,2010), pp. 1558–1562
A Tang, X Wang, Balanced RF-circuit based self-interference cancellation
for full duplex communications. Ad Hoc Netw. 24, 214–227 (2015)
M Sakai, H Lin, K Yamashita, in Proc. of IEEE Global Communications
Conference (GLOBECOM). Adaptive cancellation of self-interference infull-duplex wireless with transmitter IQ imbalance (IEEE, Austin, 2014),
pp. 3220–3224
Y Zhang, L Lazos, K Chen, B Hu, S Shivaramaiah, in Proc. of IEEE INFOCOM
Conference on Computer Communications. FD-MMAC: combating
multi-channel hidden and exposed terminals using a single transceiver(IEEE, Toronto, 2014), pp. 2742–2750
W Cheng, X Zhang, H Zhang, in Proc. of IEEE Global Communications
Conference (GLOBECOM). RTS/FCTS mechanism based full-duplex MAC
protocol for wireless networks (IEEE, Atlanta, 2013), pp. 5017–5022
S Goyal, P Liu, O Gurbuz, E Erkip, S Panwar, in Proc. of Asilomar Conferenceon Signals, Systems and Computers. A distributed MAC protocol for full
duplex radio (IEEE, Pacific Grove, 2013), pp. 788–792
A Sahai, G Patel, A Sabharwal, arXiv preprint arXiv:1107.0607 (2011)
W Choi, H Lim, A Sabharwal, Power-controlled medium access control
protocol for full-duplex wifi networks. IEEE Trans. Wirel. Commun. 14(7),3601–3613 (2015)
M Duarte, A Sabharwal, V Aggarwal, R Jana, K Ramakrishnan, CW Rice, N
Shankaranarayanan, Design and characterization of a full-duplex
multiantenna system for wifi networks. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 63(3),1160–1177 (2014)
A Tang, X Wang, A-duplex: medium access control for efficient
coexistence between full-duplex and half-duplex communications. IEEE
Trans. Wirel. Commun. 14(10), 5871–5885 (2015)
JY Kim, O Mashayekhi, H Qu, M Kazandjieva, P Levis, Janus: A novel MAC
protocol for full duplex radio. CSTR. 2(7), 23 (2013)
T Riihonen, S Werner, R Wichman, E Zacarias, in Proc. of the 10th Workshop
on Signal Processing Advances in Wireless Communications. On thefeasibility of full-duplex relaying in the presence of loop interference(IEEE, Perugia, 2009), pp. 275–279
W Cheng, X Zhang, H Zhang, in Proc. of IEEE INFOCOM Conference. Full/half
duplex based resource allocations for statistical quality of service
provisioning in wireless relay networks (IEEE, Shanghai, 2012), pp. 864–872
T Riihonen, S Werner, R Wichman, Hybrid full-duplex/half-duplex relaying
with transmit power adaptation. IEEE Trans. Wirel. Commun. 10(9),3074–3085 (2011)
IEEE Standards Association, 802.11-2012-IEEE standard for information
technology—telecommunications and information exchange between
systems local and metropolitan area networks—specific requirements
part 11: wireless lan medium access control (MAC) and physical layer(PHY) specifications (2012). http://standards.ieee.org/about/get/802/802.
11.html
G Bianchi, Performance analysis of the IEEE 802.11 distributed
coordination function. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 18(3), 535–547 (2000)
SM Najafabadi, CC Constantinou, in Proc. of IEEE 24th International
Symposium on Personal Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications (PIMRC).
A game theoretic model for wireless medium access control in thepresence of hidden terminals (IEEE, London, 2013), pp. 1731–1736
H Wu, F Zhu, Q Zhang, Z Niu, in in Proc. of IEEE Global Telecommunications
Conference. WSN02-1: analysis of IEEE 802.11 DCF with hidden terminals(IEEE, San Francisco, 2006), pp. 1–5
S Khurana, A Kahol, AP Jayasumana, in Proc. in IEEE Conference on Local
Computer Networks (LCN’98). Effect of hidden terminals on theperformance of IEEE 802.11 MAC protocol (IEEE, Lowell, 1998), pp. 12–20

Page 15 of 15

Submit your manuscript to ajournal and beneﬁt from:
7 Convenient online submission
7 Rigorous peer review
7 Immediate publication on acceptance
7 Open access: articles freely available online
7 High visibility within the ﬁeld
7 Retaining the copyright to your article

Submit your next manuscript at 7 springeropen.com