ScienceDirect® Home Skip Main Navigation Links
You have guest access to ScienceDirect. Find out more.
 
Home
Browse
My Settings
Alerts
Help
 Quick Search
 Search tips (Opens new window)
    Clear all fields    
Computer Communications
Volume 25, Issue 1, 1 January 2002, Pages 21-31
 
Font Size: Decrease Font Size  Increase Font Size
 Abstract - selected
Article
Purchase PDF (428 K)

Article Toolbox
 
 
 
Related Articles in ScienceDirect
View More Related Articles
 
View Record in Scopus
 
doi:10.1016/S0140-3664(01)00337-1    
How to Cite or Link Using DOI (Opens New Window)

Copyright © 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

Packet scheduling with delay and loss differentiation

Purchase the full-text article



References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.

A. StriegelCorresponding Author Contact Information, E-mail The Corresponding Author and G. ManimaranE-mail The Corresponding Author

Dependable Computing and Networking Laboratory, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011, USA


Received 21 December 2000;
revised 3 March 2001;
accepted 23 March 2001
Available online 30 October 2001.

Abstract

To support quality of service over the Internet, the Differentiated Services model has been proposed recently by the IETF. In the Differentiated Services model, flows with similar qualities of service (QoS) requirements are aggregated into classes in order to counter the scalability problem faced by the Integrated Services model. There have been several models proposed for service differentiation. The relative differentiated service model is one among them in which an assurance is given that ‘higher classes will be better, or at least no worse, than lower classes’. Packet delay and packet loss are two general quality metrics under which the differentiation can take place.

In this paper, we propose three schedulers based on the relative differentiated service model, namely, delay only, loss only, and both delay and loss schedulers. To evaluate the performance of the proposed schedulers, we have conducted extensive simulation studies (both per-hop and end-to-end) under uniform and non-uniform traffic loads. Our simulation studies show that the delay only and loss only schedulers differentiate effectively only in delay and loss, respectively, and the combined delay and loss scheduler differentiates effectively in both delay and loss.

Author Keywords: Differentiated services; Packet scheduling; Delay differentiation; Loss differentiation

Article Outline

1. Introduction
2. Differentiated services
2.1. Relative differentiated services
3. Proposed differential schedulers
3.1. Proportional differential model
3.2. (m,k) model and DBP scheduling scheme
3.3. Proposed generic class scheduler (C-DBP)
3.4. C-DBP-delay and C-DBP-loss schedulers
3.5. C-DBP-delay-loss scheduler
4. Simulation studies-per-hop behavior
4.1. Uniform traffic load
4.1.1. C-DBP-delay and C-DBP-loss schedulers
4.1.2. C-DBP-delay-loss scheduler
4.1.3. Predictability and controllability
4.2. Non-uniform traffic load
4.2.1. DBP-delay-loss scheduler
4.2.2. Predictability and controllability
4.2.3. Short-term performance-uniform traffic load
5. Simulation studies-end-to-end Behavior
6. Conclusions
References

















Corresponding Author Contact Information Corresponding author; email: adstrieg@iastate.edu


Computer Communications
Volume 25, Issue 1, 1 January 2002, Pages 21-31
 
Home
Browse
My Settings
Alerts
Help
Elsevier.com (Opens new window)
About ScienceDirect  |  Contact Us  |  Information for Advertisers  |  Terms & Conditions  |  Privacy Policy
Copyright © 2008 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. ScienceDirect® is a registered trademark of Elsevier B.V.