Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Service
Support
QoS #1
QOS in IP Networks
IETF groups are working on proposals to provide
QOS control in IP networks, i.e., going beyond
best effort to provide some assurance for QOS
Work in Progress includes RSVP, Differentiated
Services, and Integrated Services
Simple model
for sharing and
congestion
studies:
QoS #2
Principles for QOS Guarantees
QoS #3
Principles for QOS Guarantees (more)
QoS #4
Principles for QOS Guarantees (more)
QoS #5
Principles for QOS Guarantees (more)
QoS #6
QoS #7
Building blocks
Scheduling
Active Buffer Management
Traffic Shaping
Leaky Bucket
Token Bucket
Modeling
The (σ,ρ) Model
WFQ and delay guarantee
Admission Control
QoS Routing
QoS #8
Scheduling: How Can Routers Help
Scheduling: choosing the next packet for
transmission
FIFO/Priority Queue
Round Robin/ DRR
Weighted Fair Queuing
We had a lecture on that!
Packet dropping:
not drop-tail
not only when buffer is full
• Active Queue Management
Congestion signaling
Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN)
QoS #9
Buffer Size
Small buffers:
often drop packets due to bursts
but have small delays
Large buffers:
reduce number of packet drops (due to bursts)
but increase delays
QoS #10
Random Early Detection (RED)
Basic premise:
router should signal congestion when the queue first
starts building up (by dropping a packet)
but router should give flows time to reduce their sending
rates before dropping more packets
Note: when RED is coupled with ECN, the router can
simply mark a packet instead of dropping it
QoS #11
RED
FIFO scheduling
Buffer management:
Probabilistically discard packets
Probability is computed as a function of average queue
length (why average?)
Discard Probability
0
min_th max_th queue_len Average
Queue Length
QoS #12
RED (cont’d)
Discard
Discard Probability (P)
0
min_th max_th queue_len Average
Queue Length
Enqueue
Discard/Enqueue
probabilistically
QoS #13
RED (cont’d)
avg_len - min_th
P max_ P
max_th - min_th
Discard Probability
max_P 1
P
0
min_th max_th queue_len Average
Queue Length
avg_len
QoS #14
Average vs Instantaneous Queue
QoS #15
RED and TCP
Fairness in drops
Bursty versus non-Bursy
Probability of drop depends on rate.
Disadvantages
Many additional parameters
Increasing the loss
QoS #16
RED Summary
High network utilization with low delays when flows are long lived
Does not work well for short lived flows (like Web traffic)
Dropping packets in an already short lived flow is devastating
QoS #17
Traffic Shaping
QoS #18
The Leaky Bucket Algorithm
(a) A leaky bucket with water. (b) a leaky bucket with packets.
QoS #20
Token Bucket Algorithm
QoS #21
The Token Bucket Algorithm
5-34
p3 (1) p2 6-5=1 p1
4-2-1=1 p3,p2
QoS #23
Leaky Bucket vs Token Bucket
QoS #24
The (σ,ρ) Model
Parameters:
The average rate is ρ.
The maximum burst is σ.
(σ,ρ) Model:
Over an interval of length t,
the number of packets/bits that are admitted
is less than or equal to (σ+ρt).
QoS #26
Delay Bounds: WFQ
Corollary:
For any packet p and link rate R
• Let Time(p,S) be its completion time in policy S
• Then Time(p,WFQ)-Time(p,GPS) ≤ Lmax/R
QoS #27
Parekh-Gallagher theorem
Suppose a given connection is (,) constrained,
has maximal packet size L, and passes
through K WFQ schedulers, such that in the
ith scheduler
there is total rate r(i)
from which the connection gets g(i).
Let g be the minimum over all g(i), and suppose
all packets are at most Lmax bits long. Then
L k
L k
end - to - end delay
g i 1 g (i ) i 1 r (i )
QoS #28
P-G theorem: Interpretation
L k k
L
end - to - end delay
g i 1 g (i ) i 1 r (i )
Delay of last packet of
a burst. Only in
bottleneck node
GPS term
store&forward penalty WFQ lag behind
GPS: each node
QoS #30
Fine Points
QoS #31
Approaches to QoS
QoS #32
IETF Integrated Services
QoS #33
Intserv: QoS guarantee scenario
Resource reservation
call setup, signaling (RSVP)
traffic, QoS declaration
per-element admission control
request/
reply
QoS-sensitive
scheduling (e.g.,
WFQ)
QoS #34
Call Admission
QoS #35
RSVP request (T-Spec)
QoS #36
RSVP request (R-spec)
Task
Find a (min cost) path which satisfies the constraints
if no feasible path found, reject the connection
Generally, multiple constraints is HARD computationally.
Simple case:
BW and delay
QoS #38
Example of QoS Routing
A
B
Diffserv approach:
simple functions in network core, relatively
complex functions at edge routers (or hosts)
Don’t define service classes, provide functional
components to build service classes
QoS #40
Diffserv Architecture
QoS #41
Edge-router Packet Marking
profile: pre-negotiated rate A, and token bucket size B
packet marking at edge based on per-flow profile
Rate A
User packets
QoS #42
Classification and Conditioning
QoS #43
Classification and Conditioning
QoS #44
Forwarding (PHB)
QoS #45
Forwarding (PHB)
QoS #46
DiffServ Routers
DiffServ
Edge
Router
Classifier Marker Meter Policer
DiffServ PHB
Select PHB PHB Local
Core PHB
PHB conditions
Router
Extract Packet
DSCP treatment
QoS #47
IntServ vs. DiffServ
IntServ
network
DiffServ
network
Intserv Diffserv
Granularity of service Individual Flow Aggregate of
differentiation flows
State in routers(e.g. Per Flow Per Aggregate
scheduling, buffer
management)
Traffic Classification Several header fields DS Field
Basis
Type of service Deterministic or Absolute or
differentiation statistical guarantees relative
assurance
Admission Control Required Required for
absolute
differentiation
Signaling Protocol Required(RSVP) Not required for
relative schemes
QoS #49
Comparison of Intserv & Diffserv
Architectures
Intserv Diffserv
Coordination for End-to-End Local (Per-Hop)
service differentiation
Scope of Service A Unicast or Multicast Anywhere in a
Differentiation path Network or in
specific paths
Scalabilty Limited by the number Limited by the
of flows number of classes
of service
Network Accounting Based on flow Based on class
characteristics and QoS usage
requirement
Network Management Similar to Circuit Similar to existing
Switching networks IP networks
Interdomain Multilateral Bilateral
deployment Agreements Agreements
QoS #50