OpenAIRE is about to release its new face with lots of new content and services.
During September, you may notice downtime in services, while some functionalities (e.g. user registration, login, validation, claiming) will be temporarily disabled.
We apologize for the inconvenience, please stay tuned!
For further information please contact helpdesk[at]

fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Chai, Wei Koong; Karaliopoulos, M.; Pavlou, G. (2009)
Languages: English
Types: Article

Classified by OpenAIRE into

arxiv: Computer Science::Networking and Internet Architecture, Computer Science::Performance, Computer Science::Operating Systems
In this paper we focus on the provision of propor-\ud tional class-based service differentiation to transmission control protocol (TCP) flows in the context of bandwidth on demand(BoD) split-TCP geostationary (GEO) satellite networks. Our approach involves the joint configuration of TCP-Performance Enhancing Proxy (TCP-PEP) agents at the transport layer and the scheduling algorithm controlling the resource allocation at the Medium Access Control (MAC) layer. We show that the two differentiation mechanisms exhibit complementary behavior in achieving the desired differentiation throughout the traffic load space: the TCP-PEPs control differentiation at low and medium system utilization, whereas the MAC scheduler becomes the dominant differentiation factor under high traffic load. The main challenge for the satellite operator is to appropriately configure those two mechanisms to achieve a specific differentiation target for the different classes of TCP flows. To this end, we propose a fixed-point framework to analytically approximate the achieved differentiated TCP performance. We validate the predictive capacity of our analytical method via simulations and show that our approximations closely match the performance of different classes of TCP flows under various scenarios for the\ud network traffic load and configuration of the MAC scheduler\ud and TCP-PEP agent. Satellite network operators could use our\ud approximations as an analytical tool to tune their networks
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • [1] H. Skinnemoen and H. Tork, “Standardization activities within broadband satellite multimedia," in Proc. IEEE ICC 2002, vol. 5, New York, NY, 2002, pp. 3010-3014.
    • [2] R. Braden, D. Clark and S. Shenker, “Integrated services in the internet architecture: an overview," RFC 1633, June 1994.
    • [3] S. Blake, D. Black, M. Carlson, E. Davies, Z. Wang and W. Weiss, “An architecture for differentiated service," RFC 2475, Dec. 1998.
    • [4] A. Iera, A. Molinaro and S. Marano, “IP with QoS guarantees via Geo satellite channels: performance issues," IEEE Personal Commun., vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 14-19, June 2001.
    • [5] L. S. Ronga, T. Pecorella, E. Del Re and R. Fantacci, “A gateway architecture for IP satellite networks with dynamic resource management and DiffServ QoS provision," Int'l J. of Satell. Commun. Networking, no. 21, pp. 351-366, 2003.
    • [6] N. Iuoras and T. Le-Ngoc, “Dynamic capacity allocation for quality-ofservice support in IP-based satellite networks," IEEE Wireless Commun. Mag., vol. 12, issue 5, pp. 14-20, Oct. 2005.
    • [7] C. Dovrolis, D. Stiliadis and P. Ramanathan, “Proportional differentiated services: delay differentiation and packet scheduling," IEEE/ACM Trans. Networking, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 12-26, Feb. 2002.
    • [8] M. Welzl and M. Muhlhauser, “Scalability and quality of service: a trade-off?", IEEE Commun. Mag., pp. 32-36, June 2003.
    • [9] K. Wang, “Quality of service assurances in multihop wireless networks," PhD. Dissertation, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 2003.
    • [10] C-W. Tan, M. Gurusamy and J. C-S. Lui, “Achieving multi-class service differentiation in WDM optical burst switching networks: A probabilistic preemptive burst segmentation scheme," IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun., vol. 24, no. 12, Dec. 2006.
    • [11] M. Karaliopoulos, R. Tafazolli and B. Evans, “Providing differentiated service to TCP flows over bandwidth on demand geostationary satellite networks," IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun., vol. 22, no. 2, pp. 333-347, Feb. 2004.
    • [12] M. Roughan, A. Erramilli and D. Veitch, “Network performance for TCP networks. Part I: Persistent sources," in Proc. 17th Int'l Teletraffic Congress, Salvador, Brazil, 2001.
    • [13] ETSI EN 301 790, “Digital Video Broadcasting (DVB); Interaction channel for satellite distribution systems," ETSI European Standard (Telecommunications series), EN 301 790 V1.3.1 (2003-03).
    • [14] G. Açar, “End-to-end resource management in geostationary satellite networks," PhD. Dissertation, Imperial College London, Nov. 2001.
    • [15] H. Balakrishnan, V. N. Padmanabhan, S. Seshan and R. Katz, “A comparison of mechanisms for improving TCP performance over wireless link," in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, Stanford, CA, USA, Aug. 1996.
    • [16] M. Allman, D. Glover and L. Sanchez, “Enhancing TCP over satellite channels using standard mechanism," RFC 2488, Jan. 1999.
    • [17] T. R. Henderson and R. Katz, “Transport protocols for Internetcompatible satellite networks," IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun., vol. 17, no. 2, Feb. 1999.
    • [18] J. Ishac and M. Allman, “On the performance of TCP spoofing in satellite networks," in Proc. IEEE MILCOM, vol. 1, pp. 700-704, McLean, VA, USA, Oct. 2001.
    • [19] M. Mathis, J. Semke and J. Mahdavi, “The microscopic behaviour of the TCP congestion avoidance algorithm," Computer Commun., vol. 3, July 1999.
    • [20] J. Padhye, V. Firoiu, D. Towsley and J. Kurose, “Modelling TCP throughput: a simple model and its empirical validation," in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, Vancouver, Canada, 1998.
    • [21] N. Caldwell, S. Savage and T. Anderson, “Modelling TCP Latency," in Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, Tel-Aviv, Israel, Mar. 2000.
    • [22] E. Alberty et al. , “Adaptive coding and modulation for the DVB-S2 standard interactive applications: capacity assessment and key system issues," IEEE Wireless Commun. Mag., vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 61-69, Aug. 2007.
    • [23] M. Karaliopoulos, R. Tafazolli, and B. Evans, “Modeling split TCP latency and buffering requirements in GEO satellite networks", in Proc. IEEE WCNC 2005, vol. 3, pp. 1509-1514, New Orleans, USA, Mar. 2005.
    • [24] W. K. Chai, M. Karaliopoulos and G. Pavlou, “Scheduling for proportional differentiated service provision in geostationary bandwidth on demand satellite networks," in Proc. IEEE GLOBECOM, vol. 6, St. Louis, MO, USA, Dec. 2005.
    • [25] L. Kleinrock, Queueing Systems. NY: Wiley, 1976, vol. II.
    • [26] T. V. Lakshman and U. Madhow, “The performance of TCP/IP for networks with high bandwidth-delay products and random loss," IEEE/ACM Trans. Networking, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 336-350, June 1997.
    • [27] M. Leung, J. Lui and D. Yau, “Adaptive proportional delay differentiated services: characterization and performance evaluation," IEEE/ACM Trans. Networking, vol. 9, no. 6, pp. 801-817, Dec. 2001.
    • [28] C. Casetti and M. Meo, “An analytical framework for the performance evaluation of TCP Reno Connections," Computer Networks, vol. 37, pp. 669-682, 2001.
    • [29] V. I. Istraˇ¸tescu, Fixed point theory: an introduction. Reidel, 1981.
    • [30] The ns manual [Online]. Available: George Pavlou is a Professor of Communication Networks at the Department of Electronic and Electrical Engineering, University College London, United Kingdom where he coordinates the activities of the Networks and Services Research Lab. He holds a MEng in Engineering from the National Technical University of Athens, Greece, and MSc and PhD degrees in Computer Science from University College London, UK. He has been responsible for a number of European and UK research projects and industrial collaborations. His research interests focus on networking, network management and service engineering, including aspects such as network dimensioning, traffic engineering, quality of service management, policy-based systems, infrastructure-less wireless networks, autonomic networks and communications middleware. He has contributed to standardization activities in ISO, ITU-T, TMF, OMG and IETF.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article

Cookies make it easier for us to provide you with our services. With the usage of our services you permit us to use cookies.
More information Ok