PAS: A Fair Game-Driven DBA Scheme for
XG-PON Systems
Christos Dalamagkas,
Panagiotis Sarigiannidis, Member, IEEE,
Department of Informatics and Telecommunications
Engineering,
University of Western Macedonia,
Karamanli & Ligeris Street, 50100,
Kozani, Greece
cdalamagkas@ieee.org,
psarigiannidis@uowm.gr,
Thomas D. Lagkas, Member, IEEE
Computer Science Department, The University of Sheffield, King Abdullah II School of IT, University of Jordan, Jordan
International Faculty, CITY College,
Thessaloniki, Greece,
T.Lagkas@sheffield.ac.uk
Abstract—New generation passive optical networks (NG-
PONs) are emerged as promising technologies for delivering
bandwidth-demanding services in modern access networks. The
10-gigabit-capable passive optical network (XG-PON) standard
has been proposed as a high-throughput architecture that
realizes the Fiber-To-The-x (FTTx) paradigm, where x stands
for curb (FTTC), building (FTTB) or home (FTTH). XG-PON
is a powerful technology, capable of supporting 10 Gbit/s in the
downstream and 2.5 Gbit/s in the upstream direction. However,
in order to fully utilize the huge bandwidth in such technology,
an efficient and fair bandwidth allocation scheme is required
for adequately coordinating the transmission opportunities of
the involved network entities based on their real bandwidth
demands. A multitude of techniques and schemes have been
presented over the last few years aiming at providing dy-
namic bandwidth distribution in PONs and NG-PONs systems.
However, the vast majority of those techniques are based on
heuristics. This paper develops a novel bandwidth distribution
algorithm which is based on the tragedy of the commons
theory, aiming at ensuring a fair bandwidth distribution among
the Optical Network Units (ONUs) in a deployed XG-PON
system. The algorithm is able to apply a balanced bandwidth
distribution schedule amongst the connected ONUs, formed as
players, aiming at ensuring a fair transmission opportunity
arrangement in the upstream direction.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Optical networks present very promising characteristics
such as high throughput, flexibility, scalability and energy-
efficiency. Next Generation PONs (NG-PONs) allow 10
Gbit/s nominal speed in the downstream direction or even
symmetrically. For example, the 10-gigabit-capable PON
(XG-PON) system supports up to 10 Gbit/s downstream
rate [1]. Recently, the Telecommunication standardization
sector of the International Telecommunication Union (ITU-
T) presented the 40-Gigabit-capable passive optical networks
C. Dalamagkas, P. G. Sarigiannidis, I. D. Moscholios, T. D. Lagkas, and M. S. Obaidat, “PAS: A Fair
Game-Driven DBA Scheme for XG-PON Systems,” Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium
on Communication Systems, Networks, and Digital Signal Processing (CSNDSP), Budapest, Hungary,
July 2018.
The published version is available at IEEE Xplore: http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/CSNDSP.2018.8471787
Ioannis Moscholios, Member, IEEE
Department of Informatics and Telecommunications,
University of Peloponnese,
22100, Tripolis, Greece,
idm@uop.gr
Mohammad Obaidat, Fellow, IEEE
m.s.obaidat@ieee.org
(NG-PON2) standard that allows 4-8 time and wavelength
division multiplexing TWDM channel pairs.
PON technologies offer significant capabilities. They allow
optical lightpaths between the user premises (curb, building
and home) and the Central Office (CO) in a very cost-
effective way. The main network entities of a PON are
the Optical Network Units (ONUs), which represent the
connection interfaces where the end users access the PON
architecture and the Optical Line Terminal (OLT), which
constitutes the gateway of the architecture to the backbone.
Fig. 1 illustrates a typical architecture of a PON system in a
tree topology.
XG-PON system is emerged as one of the most promising
candidates for representing NG-PON paradigm. It incorpo-
rates a set of strong definitions and tools, such as a well-
defined Quality of Service (QoS) allocation policy. However,
an efficient Dynamic Bandwidth Allocation (DBA) scheme
is needed to leverage the huge potential of XG-PON systems.
The bandwidth distribution process in modern PON sys-
tems can be seen as a situation where many participants
interact with each other. In many cases, the participants
do not acting fairly. For example, a participant may try to
monopolize the offered transmit opportunity in the upstream
direction of a PON system. As a result an unfair bandwidth
transmission program may occurred, if the OLT, which is
responsible of creating the (transmission) program, does not
prevent such a behaviour. Game theory may be the solution
in such situations, where the participants could be modeled
as players that interact with each other. The tragedy of the
commons concept can be applied in games where n players
have to share bandwidth. This game is classified based on
two main cases: a) if the bandwidth to be shared is enough

IP
VoIP
Passive
Central
Office
Optical Line
Terminal
Splitter/
Combiner
IPTV
Optical
Network
Unit
Fig. 1: Typical architecture of a PON system in a tree
topology.
for all, based on the players’ requests then the solution is
straightforward since each player receives what requested and
b) if the available bandwidth is not enough for all, then a
bandwidth sharing policy should be devised for meeting the
players’ requests in a fair way.
The latest research efforts in the XG-PON bandwidth
distribution domain present a growing interest. Some efforts
are focused on improving the polling process by introducing
flexible intervals between the message exchange. The work in
[2] is an indicative example of dealing with flexible intervals
for alleviating the high propagation delays in the control
message exchanging between the OLT and the ONUs in a
GPON system. In a different prospective, the efforts in [3]
intend to provide a fair bandwidth allocation schedule rather
than optimizing it in terms of throughput. Those methods use
heuristic techniques by maintaining a fairness index during
the allocation process. Other works try to address the problem
of bandwidth insufficiency, i.e., when the available bandwidth
is not enough for all additional ONU requests. For instance,
in [4], a surplus bandwidth sharing method was proposed
where a fair re-distribution process is followed to allocate the
available bandwidth to the ONUs that are still unsatisfied.
Applications of XG-PON include the implementation of
hybrid optical-wireless networks, where the XG-PON real-
izes the network backhaul and multiple Long Term Evolu-
tion (LTE) radio access networks in the fronthaul part [5].
The proposed application receives traffic-aware knowledge
from the Software Defined Network (SDN) controllers and
applies an adjustment on the uplink-downlink configuration
in the LTE radio communication. The introduced scheme is
evaluated in a realistic environment using real traffic traces
such as Voice over IP (VoIP), real-time video and streaming
video. Another application is presented in [6], where an
optimized DBA is designed for supporting front-hauling over
XG-PONs. The performance evaluation of the optimized
DBA takes place in virtualized Cloud Radio Access Network
(C-RAN) architecture. In addition, in [7] a new resource
allocation scheme for cutting-edge Fiber-Wireless networks
was introduced that can be applied in the fronthaul portion
of 5G-enabled architectures. The proposed scheme performs
allocation decisions based on the outcome of an adjustable
multistage optimization problem.
In the light of the aforementioned remarks, this paper is
focused on providing a fair bandwidth distribution schedule
by applying a game stemming from the tragedy of the
commons concept. To this end, we contribute to devising
a mathematically-based bandwidth allocation scheme, which
is driven by a game with a Nash Equilibrium. The game is
demonstrated in a XG-PON system, assuming that the avail-
able bandwidth is not always enough for all end users. To this
end, a Nash equilibrium is defined and the game parameters
are settled for devising a fair distribution algorithm called
Proportional Allocation Scheme (PAS).
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section
II presents the related background. The motivation behind
this paper is provided in III. A detailed description of the
proposed PAS scheme is provided in Section IV. Section V-B
is dedicated to the evaluation process through numerical
results. Finally, conclusions are given in Section VI.
II. BACKGROUND
XG-PON systems constitute a promising solution in the
context of NG-PONs since they are able to support 10 Gbit/s
in at least one direction [8]. The XG-PON Transmission Con-
vergence (XGTC) layer incorporates functional protocols and
procedures, including resource allocation and QoS provision-
ing between the upper layers and the physical (PHY) layer
[9]. It encloses three sub-layers: a) the service adaptation
sub-layer, where Service Data Unit (SDU) encapsulation and
multiplexing takes place, forming XG-PON Encapsulation
Method (XGEM) frames, b) the framing sub-layer, where
the constructed XGEM frame is received and the downstream
XGTC frame is formed and c) the PHY sub-layer, where bit
error correction algorithms, content scrambling, and frame
synchronization are performed. The Allocation ID (Alloc-ID)
is used to identify the final user behind the XGTC payloads.
The OLT uses a downstream frame that is periodically
transmitted to all ONUs for a) data delivery, b) signaling
and c) control information delivery. The OLT broadcasts
the frame in a periodic fashion every 125 µsec. Given
that the downstream transmission rate is 9.95328 Gbit/s,
155520 bytes are available in the downstream direction.
One of the most important fields in the downstream frame
is the BandWidth map (BWmap) array. It is used by the
OLT to broadcast to the ONUs the constructed transmission
schedules which all ONUs will follow in the upcoming
upstream frames. The ONUs read the BWmap array and they
are informed about the time and the duration of the upstream
transmission opportunities [10].
On the other direction, the supported transmission rate is
2.48832 Gbit/s while the upstream frame is 125 µs long.
As a result, 38880 bytes become available for all ONUs
in each upstream frame. This fact implies that all ONUs
have to share this available bandwidth to claim upstream
transmission opportunities in each upstream window. The
Physical Synchronization Block (PSB) of the upstream frame
(PSBu) contains the preamble and the delimiter fields and
comes first within the upstream frame. Then, the XGTC
burst follows, which includes a control field in the front
(XGTC header) and a trailer (XGTC trailer). The Dynamic
Bandwidth Report (DBRu) implies the use of the status
reporting method. Status reporting allows ONUs (Alloc-IDs)
to report their buffer status. This is accomplished by the
Buffer Occupancy (BufOcc) field.
According to the ITU-T specifications, a portion of band-
width is guaranteed for all Alloc-IDs. It includes a fixed rate,
an assured rate and a maximum rate that each Alloc-ID has
the right to claim. The OLT secures the guaranteed bandwidth
for all Alloc-ID and then allocates the surplus bandwidth to
all Alloc-IDs that request additional bandwidth.
III. M OTIVATION
A. Tragedy of the Commons
When every player or partner tries to maximize one’s ben-
efit from a shared pool of resources, a situation is occurred
known as tragedy of commons [11]. In essence, the tragedy
stems from the resource devastating, which comes upon when
the demand for the resource overwhelms the supply. This
phenomenon is caused by a group of players or partners who
act selfishly by consuming or requesting additional portion of
resources and therefore they harm others who can no longer
utilize their part of the shared resources. In other words, some
players of the game neglect the well-being or the fairness of
the system towards their own interests. Besides, this situation
comes as a result of the availability of the resources to all
players without rules or policies.
B. Game Theory on Bandwidth Distribution
The tragedy of the commons situation has a lot of similari-
ties with the bandwidth distribution problem in PONs. A pool
of resources (available bandwidth in the upstream direction)
is available to multiple players (ONUs). Each player (Alloc-
ID) is free to request as much bandwidth as desires. Thus,
each Alloc-ID might act selfishly by trying to monopolize
the bandwidth distribution process. Fueled by the similarity
between the tragedy of the commons and the bandwidth
distribution problem in PONs, in this paper we investigate the
function of solutions related with the tragedy of the commons
situation in the XG-PON systems.
IV. G AME - DRIVEN XG-PON BANDWIDTH A LLOCATION
A. Game Theory Parameters
This section describes the proposed game-driven fair band-
width allocation for XG-PON systems. First, the resource
manager is defined as the bandwidth allocation coordinator.
This role is played by the OLT. The set of Alloc-IDs that
request non-guaranteed bandwidth (N ) are the players of the
game. For simplicity reasons we assume that each Alloc-ID
is connected to a single ONU. Strategy of each player is
the bandwidth that requests, i.e., the value of the BufOcc
field contained in the upstream XGTC burst. The resource
manager receives all bandwidth requests and proceeds to the
bandwidth allocation schedule construction. Table I summa-
rizes the parameters adopted in the game.
TABLE I: Game Parameters
C Available upstream capacity
N Set of players (Alloc-IDs)
a = {a1 . . . ai } Vector of assigned bandwidth to players in N
values of GrantSize fields in allocation y
Ui (ai ) Utility enjoyed by player i, cause of allocation ai
s = {s1 . . . si } Vector of bids of player in N
values of BufOcc fields of Alloc-IDs in cycle y
The game equilibrium depends on the player utility func-
tion. Let ai represents the bandwidth assigned to i−th Alloc-
ID by the DBA mechanism. Hence, a reasonable and realistic
utility function is needed to describe the enjoyed satisfaction
of player i by the bandwidth allocation ai . We adopt the
elastic traffic utility function as described in [12]. Let Ui be
this utility function. Note that the explicit definition of Ui is
not required in the context of this game, but it is important
to assume that the function is log-concave, so the marginal
utility concept is being applied. The definition of Ui is given
as follows:
Definition IV.1. Ui is concave, strictly increasing and
continuous ∀i ∈ N , where ai ≥ 0. It is continuously
differentiable for ai > 0, while Ui′ (ai )|ai =0 6= ∞. Let
U denote the set of all utility functions that satisfy the
aforementioned conditions.
As a next step, a pricing scheme is defined which relates
what a player offers to what a player should receive. Consider
that
P the resource manager always try to clear the market,
i αi = C. Further assuming that the manager does not
price-discriminate, each player is charged the same price µ >
0, leading to ai = si /µ. In this case, we expect the price µ
to satisfy the following equation:
X si
µ= (1)
i
C
This price leads to a market-clearing process, where the
price is set to such a value so as the offer to be equal to the
request. In the following, the payoff function is defined which
determines the player satisfaction by taking into account the
strategy from the other players. Considering that s−i stands
for the other players strategy, except i, each player selects a
strategy si in order to maximize the following equation [13]:
 !
s
Pi

U
i C − si , if si > 0
Qr (si ; s−i ) = j sj (2)

U (0), if si = 0

Given that the price is different for each player (Eq. 1)
and the payoff function is adopted based on that price, the
game affects the players in N explicitly. In accordance with
the payoff function, the Nash equilibrium is now feasible:
Definition IV.2. A Nash equilibrium of the game defined by
(Q1 , . . . , Qi ) is a vector s ≥ 0 such that ∀i:
 To conclude the proof, observe that GAME has a strictly
Qi (si ; s−i ) ≥ Qi (s̄i ; s−i ), ∀s̄i ≥ 0 (3) concave and continuous objective function over a compact
feasible region, and thus has a unique optimal solution, which
We have now defined all required game parameters. The implies uniqueness of the Nash equilibrium as well [15].
following definition charazterizes the underlying game as an
optimization problem of bandwidth distribution allocation in B. The PAS Algorithm
XG-PON systems. Note that the utility function has been The presented PAS algorithm is triggered upon distributing
edited accordingly, so that the players are price anticipators the guaranteed bandwidth to all Alloc-IDs (Rf stands for the
[14]: fixed bandwidth, Rα stands for the assured bandwidth) and
Theorem IV.1. Suppose |N | > 1. Then there exists a the following conditions are met: a) there is still available
unique Nash Equilibrium s ≥ P 0 of the game defined by bandwidth, b) at least two Alloc-IDs request additional band-
(Q1 , . . . , Q|N | ) and it satisfies i si > 0. In this case, the width and c) the additional bandwidth requests exceed the
vector a defined by: available bandwidth. The Algorithm introduces the proposed
game theory-based bandwidth allocation process.
si The algorithm receives all the (pending) Alloc-IDs’ re-
ai = P C, ∀i ∈ N (4)
j sj quests (R), after addressing the guaranteed bandwidth re-
is the unique optimal solution to the following optimization quests. Also, it receives the available bandwidth C and the
problem (GAME): set of all Alloc-IDs (I). The algorithm exports the set of
final allocations (A), which describes the final bandwidth
X
maximize Ûi (ai ) distribution for all Alloc-IDs (players). First of all, the set
ai of players (N ), strategies (S) and allocations are initialized.
i
X
(5) Then these sets are filled by determining the players of the
subject to ai ≤ C
game and their strategies (lines 4-9). In lines 10 − 13 the
i
algorithm performs the game theory approach based on the
ai ≥ 0, ∀i ∈ N
Nash Equilibrium.
where Ûr is defined as follows:
Algorithm: Proportional Allocation Scheme
 ai  Input: R, C, I
ai  a 1
 Z
i
Ûi (ai ) = 1 − Ui (ai ) + Ui (z)dz (6) Output: A
C C ai 0 1: N ← ∅
Proof. Given the fact that each component of vector s is a 2: S ← ∅
positive value, the pay-off of each user is strictly concave 3: A ← ∅
and continuous in si so that s is a Nash equilibrium if and 4: for i ∈ U do
only if the following first-order conditions hold: 5: if Ri > 0 then
6: N ←N ∪i
! ! P
sj 7: S ← S ∪ ri
s si
Ui′ Pi C 1− P =
j
, if si > 0 8: end if
j sj j sj C 9: end for
(7) 10: for i ∈ N$do %
si · C
P
j sj
Ui′ (0) ≤ , if si = 0 11: ai ← P
C j sj
(8) 12: A ← A ∪ ai
P 13: end for
Replacing ρ = j sj /C and ai = si /ρ then the preceding
conditions can be rewritten as:
V. P ERFORMANCE E VALUATION
Ui′ (ai ) = ρ, if ai > 0 (9) In this section, we provide the performance evaluation of
Ui′ (0) ≤ ρ, if ai = 0 (10) the proposed game-based algorithm.
X
ai = C (11) A. Evaluation Enviroment
i
An XG-PON simulation environment was implemented
Since the utility functions Ûi (ai ) are strictly concave using Matlab. All ITU-T specifications were followed, e.g.,
and continuous over 0 ≤ ai ≤ C, the preceding first- the upstream and the downstream rate of the XG-PON were
order conditions are sufficient optimality conditions for the set to 2.48832 Gbit/s and 9.95328 Gbit/s, respectively. The
game.
P We conclude that s is a Nash equilibrium if and only buffer of each ONU was large enough to avoid packet drops.
if j sj > 0, and the resulting allocation a solvesP the Each ONU consists of a single Alloc-ID. The fixed and the
problem GAME with Lagrange multiplier ρ = j s j /C. assured bandwidth rates were set to 250 and 500 bytes per
Alloc-ID. A guard time of 64 bits was inserted between 1
Load fairness index as ONUs increase

upstream allocations of different ONUs. The ONUs have 0.9

been placed uniformly having a distance from 20 to 60 Km. 0.8
PAS was compared to the single standard bandwidth

Load fairness index

0.7 Default
allocation scheme (XG-PON Standard) [1]. The standard PAS

scheme applies the pure allocation method where: a) the 0.6

guaranteed bandwidth requests are addressed and b) the sur- 0.5

plus bandwidth is shared all Alloc-IDs that request additional 0.4

bandwidth equally. No fairness index is monitored. 0.3

Each simulation experiment was conducted for 60 sec. The 0.2
traffic used is synthetic and generated based on real traffic
0.1
traces. Three real services were considered, namely: a) VoIP, 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32
ONUs
b) video streaming application, and c) live stream session.
Synthetic traffic flows were produced for each ONU in the Fig. 2: Load fairness subject to the number of ONUs.
upstream direction by combining multiple services so that
the aggregate traffic demand of each ONU was 100 Mbit/s, 1
Delay fairness index as ONUs increase

in order to exceed the available bandwidth (38880 bytes each

125 µs) when the number of ONUs gets higher than 24. To 0.9

this end, a background traffic of constant bit rate was also 0.8

Delay fairness index

multiplexed with the real traces.
0.7
Default
B. Numerical Results PAS
0.6
Numerical results are presented in this sub-section in terms
of fairness provisioning. In order to assess fairness we adopt 0.5

the well known Jain’s fairness index in two modes: a) the 0.4
load fairness index and b) the delay fairness index. The load
fairness index denotes how fair is the bandwidth distribution 0.3
4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32
subject to the allocated traffic each ONU received. It is ONUs

defined as follows: Fig. 3: Delay fairness subject to the number of ONUs.

PN
( i=1 li )2
J(l1 , l2 , · · · , lN ) = PN
N i=1 li2
The parameter li expresses the fraction of the bandwidth
received by i ONU divided by the total bandwidth allocated
to all ONUs. For example, in an XG-PON system with three
ONUs consider that the first ONU receives 1400 bytes, the
second ONU receives 1800 bytes and the third ONU receives
1100 bytes. Hence, l1 = 1400 1800 1100
3800 , l2 = 3800 , l3 = 3800 , while
J(l1 , l2 , l3 ) = 0.9615. The optimal value of the load fairness
index is 1.
On the other hand, the delay fairness index denotes how
fair is the bandwidth distribution subject to the delay mea-
sured in each ONU. It is defined as follows:
PN
( i=1 ai )2
J(a1 , a2 , · · · , aN ) = PN
(12)
to do with the (network) saturation point which deliberately
occurs when the number of ONUs is 24. During the first
phase, the performance of the two schemes is similar while
PAS succeeds to slightly excel, especially when the number
of ONUs is 16. This minor improvement is due to the narrow
operation of the PAS bandwidth allocation algorithm, which
is partly triggered when the requested bandwidth is larger
than the offered capacity. As expected, both schemes present
losses in terms of load fairness, even though PAS manages
Mean packet delay as ONUs increase
180
Default
160 PAS
140
(13)
Mean Packet Delay (msec)

N i=1 a2i 120

100
The parameter ai stands for the fraction of the delay expe-
rienced by i ONU divided by the average delay experienced 80

by all ONUs. Similar to the load fairness index, the optimal 60

value of the delay index is 1. 40

Fig. 2 illustrates the load fairness index as the number of 20

ONUs change within [4, 8, 12, 16, 20, 24, 28, 32]. Two phases 0
can be distinguished as the number of ONUs becomes larger. 4 8 12 16
ONUs
20 24 28 32

The first phase is defined from 4 to 20 ONUs while the

second phase applies when the number of ONUs is larger Fig. 4: Average upstream delay subject to the number of
than 20. The subtle point that divides the two phases has ONUs.
 Goodput as ONUs increase
2500
2000
Goodput(Mbps)
1500
1000
500
0
4 8 12 16 20 24
ONUs
Fig. 5: Aggregated system goodput subject to the number of
ONUs.
to limit these losses about 5% on average. The equilibrium
that PAS offers does actually take place in the second phase
where the network is saturated. The designed game is totally
triggered since the case where the requested bandwidth is not
enough for all ONUs is much frequent than in the first phase.
Thus, while the default scheme collapses, the proposed game-
theoretic scheme is able not only to maintain the recorded
load fairness in the levels of the first phase, but to increase
it to the maximum when the number of ONUs is more than
24.
Fig. 3 shows the latency fairness index. Once again the
performance interpretation is divided into two phases, i.e.,
before and after the saturation point. Here, the observed
performance of PAS is much more intensive. While the
default bandwidth allocation scheme collapses when N = 24
(it seems to improve the recorded latency fairness index later
due to queue stabilization), the proposed scheme achieves to
optimize the latency fairness index to almost 1. The good
performance of the PAS scheme is due to the fact that
the variance of the latency each ONU experiences depends
strongly on the propagation delay rather than the transmission
delay. As a result, the expected differences in terms of latency
are slightly reflected in Fig. 3 compared to Fig. 2.
The performance analysis is not enough if only fairness in-
dices are examined without observing the average latency and
the goodput. In order to acquire safe performance evaluation
results, the measurement of the average latency is provided
in Fig. 4. As expected, the average latency increases as the
number of ONUs becomes larger. However, what is important
to point here is that the performance of the two schemes is
almost the same, while PAS offers a slight improvement. This
is quite important so as to verify the complete superiority of
the PAS since it succeeds to offer a fair bandwidth allocation
while keeping, yet slightly improving, the average latency in
the XG-PON system. This fact is also validated by Fig. 5
which shows the network goodput. Fig. 5 verifies two main
points: a) it clearly highlights the saturation point (it happens
at the point the goodput is stabilized) and b) it validates the
superiority of PAS since it is evident that the applied game
offers equilibrium in the bandwidth allocation process.
VI. C ONCLUSIONS
This paper validates the superiority of the game theory
approach in handling bandwidth allocation in XG-PON sys-
tems when the requested bandwidth is likely more than the
offered capacity. The approach is realized by the PAS scheme
which is able to adequately coordinate the transmission
opportunities of ONUs, when contending each other, by
providing a fair resource allocation policy. The rationale
Default
behind the applied game is based on the tragedy of the
PAS common concept. The PAS scheme was applied to the XG-
28 32 PON paradigm by offering an efficient resource allocation
solution, resulting in a fair and efficient transmission schedule
in the upstream direction. Simulation results demonstrate
the superiority of the proposed scheme against the standard
bandwidth allocation in terms of fairness while maintaining,
yet slightly improving, the average upstream latency and the
network goodput.
R EFERENCES
[1] G.987.1 : 10-Gigabit-capable passive optical networks (XG-PON):
General requirements, International Telecommunication Union, ITU,
2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-G.987.1/en
[2] K. Kanonakis and I. Tomkos, “Offset-based scheduling with flexible
intervals for evolving gpon networks,” Lightwave Technology, Journal
of, vol. 27, no. 15, pp. 3259–3268, Aug 2009.
[3] P. Sarigiannidis, G. Papadimitriou, P. Nicopolitidis, E. Varvarigos, and
K. Yiannopoulos, “Towards a fair and efficient downlink bandwidth
distribution in xg-pon frameworks,” in Mediterranean Electrotechnical
Conference (MELECON), 2014 17th IEEE, April 2014, pp. 49–53.
[4] M.-S. Han, “Dynamic bandwidth allocation with high utilization for
xg-pon,” in Advanced Communication Technology (ICACT), 2014 16th
International Conference on, Feb 2014, pp. 994–997.
[5] P. Sarigiannidis, A. Sarigiannidis, I. Moscholios, and
P. Zwierzykowski, “Diana: A machine learning mechanism for
adjusting the tdd uplink-downlink configuration in xg-pon-lte
systems,” Mobile Information Systems, vol. 2017, 2017.
[6] A. M. Mikaeil, W. Hu, T. Ye, and S. B. Hussain, “Performance
evaluation of xg-pon based mobile front-haul transport in cloud-
ran architecture,” IEEE/OSA Journal of Optical Communications and
Networking, vol. 9, no. 11, pp. 984–994, Nov 2017.
[7] T. Lagkas, P. Sarigiannidis, P. Bellavista, and C. Giannelli, “Multi-
stage resource allocation in hybrid 25g-epon and lte-advanced pro fiwi
networks for 5g systems,” IET Networks, 2018.
[8] F. J. Effenberger, “The xg-pon system: Cost effective 10 gb/s access,”
J. Lightwave Technol., vol. 29, no. 4, pp. 403–409, Feb 2011.
[Online]. Available: http://jlt.osa.org/abstract.cfm?URI=jlt-29-4-403
[9] Z. Li, L. Yi, and W. Hu, “Key technologies and system proposals
of twdm-pon,” Frontiers of Optoelectronics, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 46–56,
2013. [Online]. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12200-012-0305-
7
[10] G.987.2 : 10-Gigabit-capable passive optical networks (XG-
PON): Physical media dependent (PMD) layer specification,
International Telecommunication Union, ITU, 2016. [Online].
Available: https://www.itu.int/rec/TREC- G.987.2/en
[11] G. Hardin, “The tragedy of the commons,” Science, vol. 162, no. 3859,
pp. 1243–1248, 1968.
[12] S. Shenker, “Fundamental design issues for the future internet,” IEEE
Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 13, no. 7, pp. 1176–
1188, 9 1995.
[13] R. Johari and J. N. Tsitsiklis, “Efficiency loss in a network resource
allocation game,” Mathematics of Operations Research, vol. 29, no. 3,
pp. 407–435, 8 2004.
[14] B. Hajek and G. Gopalakrishnan, “Do greedy autonomous systems
make for a sensible internet?” in Conference on Stochastic Networks,
Stanford University, vol. 222, 2002.
[15] T. R. Noam Nisan, Algorithmic Game Theory. Cambridge University
Pr., 2007.