QOS مظفر بگ محمدی دانشگاه ایلام. 2 Why a New Service Model? Best effort clearly insufficient –Some applications need more assurances from the network.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Quality of Service CS 457 Presentation Xue Gu Nov 15, 2001.
Advertisements

Spring 2003CS 4611 Quality of Service Outline Realtime Applications Integrated Services Differentiated Services.
Spring 2000CS 4611 Quality of Service Outline Realtime Applications Integrated Services Differentiated Services.
Integrated and Differentiated Services Christos Papadopoulos CS551 – Fall 2002 (
CS640: Introduction to Computer Networks Aditya Akella Lecture 20 – QoS.
Xiaowei Yang CS 356: Computer Network Architectures Lecture 19: Integrated Services and Differentiated Services Xiaowei Yang
15-744: Computer Networking L-18 QOS - IntServ. QOS & IntServ QOS IntServ Architecture Assigned reading [She95] Fundamental Design Issues for the Future.
QoS: IntServ and DiffServ Supplemental Slides Aditya Akella 02/26/2007.
CSE Computer Networks Prof. Aaron Striegel Department of Computer Science & Engineering University of Notre Dame Lecture 20 – March 25, 2010.
1 Providing Quality of Service in the Internet Based on Slides from Ross and Kurose.
Differentiated Services. Service Differentiation in the Internet Different applications have varying bandwidth, delay, and reliability requirements How.
15-441: Computer Networking Lecture 18: QoS Thanks to David Anderson and Srini Seshan.
ACN: IntServ and DiffServ1 Integrated Service (IntServ) versus Differentiated Service (Diffserv) Information taken from Kurose and Ross textbook “ Computer.
CS Summer 2003 Lecture 8. CS Summer 2003 Populating LFIB with LDP Assigned/Learned Labels Changes in the LFIB may be triggered routing or.
CS 268: Differentiated Services Ion Stoica February 25, 2003.
CSE 401N Multimedia Networking-2 Lecture-19. Improving QOS in IP Networks Thus far: “making the best of best effort” Future: next generation Internet.
15-744: Computer Networking L-18 QOS - IntServ. QOS & IntServ QOS IntServ Architecture Assigned reading [She95] Fundamental Design Issues for the Future.
1 Quality of Service Outline Realtime Applications Integrated Services Differentiated Services.
15-744: Computer Networking
School of Information Technologies IP Quality of Service NETS3303/3603 Weeks
15-744: Computer Networking L-22 QOS - IntServ. L -22; © Srinivasan Seshan, QOS & IntServ QOS IntServ Architecture Assigned reading [She95]
Internet QoS Syed Faisal Hasan, PhD (Research Scholar Information Trust Institute) Visiting Lecturer ECE CS/ECE 438: Communication Networks.
CSc 461/561 CSc 461/561 Multimedia Systems Part C: 3. QoS.
CS 268: Lecture 10 (Integrated Services) Ion Stoica March 4, 2002.
CS 268: Lecture 11 (Differentiated Services) Ion Stoica March 6, 2001.
Spring 2002CS 4611 Quality of Service Outline Realtime Applications Integrated Services Differentiated Services.
Internet Quality of Service. Quality of Service (QoS) The best-effort model, in which the network tries to deliver data from source to destination but.
24-1 Chapter 24. Congestion Control and Quality of Service part Quality of Service 23.6 Techniques to Improve QoS 23.7 Integrated Services 23.8.
Computer Networking Intserv, Diffserv, RSVP.
15-744: Computer Networking L-7 QoS. QoS IntServ DiffServ Assigned reading [She95] Fundamental Design Issues for the Future Internet Optional [CSZ92]
Quality of Service. Overview Why QoS? When QoS? One model: Integrated services Contrast to Differentiated Services (more modern; more practical; not covered)
QoS in MPLS SMU CSE 8344.
Computer Networking Quality-of-Service (QoS) Dr Sandra I. Woolley.
Integrated Services (RFC 1633) r Architecture for providing QoS guarantees to individual application sessions r Call setup: a session requiring QoS guarantees.
IntServ / DiffServ Integrated Services (IntServ)
CSE679: QoS Infrastructure to Support Multimedia Communications r Principles r Policing r Scheduling r RSVP r Integrated and Differentiated Services.
CS Spring 2011 CS 414 – Multimedia Systems Design Lecture 23 - Multimedia Network Protocols (Layer 3) Klara Nahrstedt Spring 2011.
CSE QoS in IP. CSE Improving QOS in IP Networks Thus far: “making the best of best effort”
IP QoS for 3G. A Possible Solution The main focus of this network QoS mechanism is to provide one, real time, service in addition to the normal best effort.
Computer Networking Intserv, Diffserv, RSVP.
CS 268: Integrated Services Lakshminarayanan Subramanian Feb 20, 2003.
CSC 336 Data Communications and Networking Lecture 8d: Congestion Control : RSVP Dr. Cheer-Sun Yang Spring 2001.
1 Quality of Service Outline Realtime Applications Integrated Services Differentiated Services MPLS.
CIS679: DiffServ Model r Review of Last Lecture r 2-bit DiffServ architecture.
Wolfgang EffelsbergUniversity of Mannheim1 Differentiated Services for the Internet Wolfgang Effelsberg University of Mannheim September 2001.
CSE Computer Networks Prof. Aaron Striegel Department of Computer Science & Engineering University of Notre Dame Lecture 20 – March 25, 2010.
© Jörg Liebeherr, Quality-of-Service Architectures for the Internet Integrated Services (IntServ)
© Jörg Liebeherr, Quality-of-Service Architectures for the Internet.
CS640: Introduction to Computer Networks Aditya Akella Lecture 21 – QoS.
EE 122: Lecture 15 (Quality of Service) Ion Stoica October 25, 2001.
Advance Computer Networking L-7 QoS. QoS IntServ DiffServ Assigned reading [ [She95] Fundamental Design Issues for the Future Internet [CSZ92] Supporting.
An End-to-End Service Architecture r Provide assured service, premium service, and best effort service (RFC 2638) Assured service: provide reliable service.
Differentiated Services IntServ is too complex –More focus on services than deployment –Functionality similar to ATM, but at the IP layer –Per flow QoS.
Differentiated Services Two Approaches for Providing QoS on the Internet u “Freeway model” -- integrated services Internet (intserv) – Build a dedicated.
15-441: Computer Networking Lecture 23: QoS and Mobile/Wireless Networking.
Chapter 6 outline r 6.1 Multimedia Networking Applications r 6.2 Streaming stored audio and video m RTSP r 6.3 Real-time, Interactive Multimedia: Internet.
EE 122: Integrated Services Ion Stoica November 13, 2002.
Univ. of TehranIntroduction to Computer Network1 An Introduction Computer Networks An Introduction to Computer Networks University of Tehran Dept. of EE.
An End-to-End Service Architecture r Provide assured service, premium service, and best effort service (RFC 2638) Assured service: provide reliable service.
Integrated Services & RSVP Types of pplications Basic approach in IntServ Key components Service models.
Quality of Service Frameworks Hamed Khanmirza Principles of Network University of Tehran.
1 Lecture 15 Internet resource allocation and QoS Resource Reservation Protocol Integrated Services Differentiated Services.
Advanced Computer Networks
CS 268: Computer Networking
Taxonomy of network applications
Advanced Computer Networks
EE 122: Lecture 18 (Differentiated Services)
EE 122: Differentiated Services
CIS679: Two Planes and Int-Serv Model
University of Houston Quality of Service Datacom II Lecture 3
Presentation transcript:

QOS مظفر بگ محمدی دانشگاه ایلام

2 Why a New Service Model? Best effort clearly insufficient –Some applications need more assurances from the network What is the basic objective of network design? –Maximize total bandwidth? Minimize latency? –Maximize user satisfaction – the total utility given to users What does utility vs. bandwidth look like? –Must be non-decreasing function –Shape depends on application

3 Utility curve – Elastic traffic Bandwidth U Elastic Does equal allocation of bandwidth maximize total utility?

4 Admission Control If U(bandwidth) is concave  elastic applications –Incremental utility is decreasing with increasing bandwidth –Is always advantageous to have more flows with lower bandwidth No need of admission control and explicit QoS mechanisms BW U Elastic

5 Utility Curves – Inelastic traffic BW U Hard real-time BW U Delay-adaptive Does equal allocation of bandwidth maximize total utility?

6 QoS and Admission Control If U is convex  inelastic applications –U(number of flows) is no longer monotonically increasing Need admission control and special QoS mechanisms –Admission control  deciding when the addition of new people would result in reduction of utility BW U Delay-adaptive

7 QoS Instantiation #1: Integrated Services Key components: 1.Type of commitment What does the network promise? 2.Packet scheduling How does the network meet promises? 3.Service interface How does the application describe what it wants?

8 Type of Commitments Guaranteed service –For hard real-time applications –Fixed guarantee, network meets commitment as long as rates clients send at match traffic agreement Predicted service –For tolerant (e.g. delay-adaptive) applications –Two components If conditions do not change, commit to current service If conditions change, take steps to deliver consistent performance (help apps minimize playback delay). Ensure that such apps continue to see a lightly loaded network. Datagram/best effort service

9 Scheduling for Guaranteed Traffic Use token bucket filter to characterize traffic –Described by rate r and bucket depth b –FlowSpec or flow specification Use Weighted Fair-Queueing at the routers Parekh’s bound for worst case queuing delay = b/r

10 Token Bucket Specs BW Time Flow A Flow B Flow A: r = 1 MBps, B=1 byte Flow B: r = 1 MBps, B=1MB

11 Putting It All Together Assume 3 types of traffic: guaranteed, predictive, best-effort Scheduling: use WFQ in routers Each guaranteed flow gets its own queue All predicted service flows and best effort aggregates in single separate priority queue –Predictive traffic classes Worst case delay for classes separated by order of magnitude Strict priority queueing – coupled with admission control into each priority level Higher priority steals scheduling cycles from lower priority - One way isolation –Best effort traffic acts as lowest priority class

12 Resource Reservation Protocol (RSVP) Carries resource requests all the way through the network Main goal: establish “state” in each of the routers so they “know” how they should treat flows. –State = packet classifier parameters, bandwidth reservation,.. At each hop consults admission control and sets up reservation. Informs requester if failure Key properties –Receiver driven –Soft state Periodically refresh reservations A B C D

13 PATH Messages PATH messages carry sender’s flow properties Routers note the direction PATH messages arrived and set up reverse path to sender Receivers send RESV messages that follow reverse path and setup reservations If reservation cannot be made, user gets an error

14 RESV Messages Forwarded via reverse path of PATH Queuing delay and bandwidth requirements Source traffic characteristics (from PATH) Filter specification –Which transmissions can use the reserved resources Router performs admission control and reserves resources –If request rejected, send error message

15 Differentiated Services: Motivation and Design Edge routers do coarse grain enforcement –Label packets with a type field Uses IP TOS bits E.g. a priority stamp Core routers process packets based on packet marking More scalable than IntServ –No signaling –No per-flow state in the core –More useful between a pair of neighboring networks, while IntServ was end-to-end –Typically used by multi-campus enterprises with all campuses connected to the same ISP Classification and conditioning

16 DiffServ Example first hop router internal router edge router host edge router ISP Company A Unmarked packet flow Packets in premium flows have bit set Premium packet flow restricted to R bytes/sec Set bits appropriately Check if bits conform Sign a service level agreement with ISP. (SLA)

17 Expedited Forwarding User sends within agreed profile & network commits to delivery with requested profile –Strong guarantee –User cannot exceed profile  packets will get dropped Core router  Simple forwarding: if packet marked as EF, put in priority queue –EF packets are forwarded with minimal delay and loss (up to the capacity of the router)

18 Assured Forwarding AF defines 4 classes –Strong assurance for traffic within profile & allow source to exceed profile Implement services that differ relative to each other (e.g., gold service, silver service…) –Within each class, there are at least two drop priorities Traffic unlikely to be dropped if user maintains profile User and network agree to some traffic profile –Edges mark packets up to allowed rate as “in-profile” or high priority –Other packets are marked with lower “out-of-profile” priority –A congested router drops lower priority packets with a lot higher probability Implemented using RED based priority queuing

19 Traffic Conditioning: At Customer Edge Wait for token Set EF bit Packet input Packet output Drop on overflow Test if token Set AF “in” bit token No token Packet input Packet output AF traffic (two classes) EF traffic

20 Edge Router Policing: At ISP Edge Arriving packet Is packet marked? Token available? Token available? Clear “in” bit Drop packet Forwarding engine AF “in” set EF set Not marked no

21 Router Output Processing What type?High-priority Q Low-priority Q with priority drop Packets out EF AF Strict high priority used