1 / 63

Quality of Service and the End to End Argument IEEE Network November/December 2007

This article discusses the importance of quality of service (QoS) in audio-visual services on the internet and explores probe-based admission control as a means to achieve QoS. It also compares and discusses different layer QoS support proposals and the possibility of their deployment.

gloriasmith
Télécharger la présentation

Quality of Service and the End to End Argument IEEE Network November/December 2007

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Quality of Service and the End to End ArgumentIEEE Network November/December 2007 Gunnar Karlsson, School of Electrical Engineering of KTH, the Royal Institute of Technology Ignacio Mas, IPTV development at Ericsson Research Presented by Guan-Wei, Chen OPLAB_IM_NTU

  2. About Authors - Gunnar Karlsson • receive his M.S. degree from Chalmers University of Technology in Gothenburg, Sweden(1983) • receive his PH.D. degree from Columbia university(1989), New York • research related to quality of service and wireless content distribution OPLAB_IM_NTU

  3. About Authors - Ignacio Mas • receive his M.S. degree in electrical engineering from the Royal Institute of Technology (Stockholm, Sweden) • now he is a doctoral student at KTH • his research interests are in multimedia networking ,quality of service, and operating systems OPLAB_IM_NTU

  4. Abstract • Audio-visual service are now popular in the internet • earlier base on batch downloading, now real-time interactive and streaming services grow rapidly • can benefit from QoS if it widely provided • Quality is obtained by means of probe-based admission control • then implementation on Application Layer, Transport Layer, Network Layer • Compared and discussed the possibility deployment OPLAB_IM_NTU

  5. Today’s Agenda 1-Introduction About Quality of Service 2-Probe-Based Admission Control 3-Different Layer QoS Support 4-Comparison of the Proposals 5-Deployment and Operator 6-Related Work 7-Conclusion OPLAB_IM_NTU

  6. Today’s Agenda 1-Introduction About Quality of Service 2-Probe-Based Admission Control 3-Different Layer QoS Support 4-Comparison of the Proposals 5-Deployment and Operator 6-Related Work 7-Conclusion OPLAB_IM_NTU

  7. Introduction • multitude of quality of service, the traffic defined • Asynchronous transfer mode architecture • Integrated service architecture • Differentiated service architecture • most proposed QoS solution within one of three architecture • limited QoS offering from Internet Service Provider • lock of deployed QoS solutions OPLAB_IM_NTU

  8. Introduction • little attention QoS researchers have given the culture of network operations to avoid complexity and anticipate failure • addition of QoS mechanisms would introduce new potential failure mode • it might be difficult to debug and • has to be weighed against the uncertain benefit of providing QoS support • QoS function traditionally been associated with the network (Ex: admission control ,scheduling, and policy ) OPLAB_IM_NTU

  9. Introduction • provide some form of QoS without changes to the network operation or network • lifting the QoS mechanisms out of the network to higher protocol layers would have advantages: • QoS is provided from host to host • The QoS mechanisms may develop independent of the network • the management and operation of a network remains unaffected • assigning functions to the layers of a protocol architecture relied on end-to-end argument OPLAB_IM_NTU

  10. Introduction • Functions places at low levels of a system may be redundant or of a little value when compared with the cost of providing them at that low level • Application Layer solution can be without standardization, but gives the least benefit (Ex: prevent setting up session when congestion) • Transport Layer solution needs standardization and provides differentiation into two traffic class • Network Layer solution can reinforce differentiation OPLAB_IM_NTU

  11. Introduction-Quality of Service • QoS is the collective effect of service performances which determine the degree of satisfaction of a user of the service • QoS is often associated performance metrics are packet loss and delay, and also restricted scope • Affect user satisfaction: traffic control behavior、route changes、sensitivity to service attack and latency in fault handling…. OPLAB_IM_NTU

  12. Introduction-Quality of Service • TCP attempts to share the rate of a bottleneck link fairly over all ongoing TCP sessions • Throughput variations when sessions enter or leave and when the total data rate of the sessions changes due to additive-increase multiplicative-decrease congestion control • One possible is complementary policy to block new real time session when congestion, to allow admitted sessions to remain unresponsive OPLAB_IM_NTU

  13. Introduction-Quality of Service • the policy base on human perception of real time streaming interactive service with audio-visual signals • There is a trade-off between the distortion and the resulting bit rate • Lower data rate, higher the distortion • Noticeable quality variations reduce user satisfaction even average quality is high, so our interesting in limiting the throughput variations • Use probe-base admission control OPLAB_IM_NTU

  14. Today’s Agenda 1-Introduction About Quality of Service 2-Probe-Based Admission Control 3-Different Layer QoS Support 4-Comparison of the Proposals 5-Deployment and Operator 6-Related Work 7-Conclusion OPLAB_IM_NTU

  15. Probe-Based Admission Control • base on transmission of a probe which consists of a stream of probe packets • used to infer the state of a network path • lasts a few seconds and constitutes small addition to total session length • Probe rate (rpr) is constant, and session rate is not allowed to exceed it • the mean of the data rate of the session and distribution can’t know in advance when the rate is variable OPLAB_IM_NTU

  16. Probe-Based Admission Control OPLAB_IM_NTU

  17. Probe-base admission control • Receiver measures the loss and possibly the delay for the probe • Admission control classified in Per-hop and End-point (Probe-base ) • Need queue to save probe • Double queues • Threshold-queue • The acceptance decision given that OPLAB_IM_NTU

  18. Probe-base admission control • The backoff randomizes new setup attempts if the failure was too many simultaneous probes • Probe packets contain session and control data • Control data include parameters for the configuration of the receiving application • Session data can be a greeting or ring tone • Probe packet stream can use for clock synchronization and allowing the jitter removal system to settle into steady state • Use data rate of the session for decision rather than probe rate ,the to leave group more reliable and to remain group less reliable OPLAB_IM_NTU

  19. Probe-base admission control • An important of end-to-end admission control is the stability of the route for an accepted session • Route changes occur two conditions: • Load balancing scheme reducing the load of the link • topological changes application notice a disruption in the data flow OPLAB_IM_NTU

  20. Today’s Agenda 1-Introduction About Quality of Service 2-Probe-Based Admission Control 3-Different Layer QoS Support 4-Comparison of the Proposals 5-Deployment and Operator 6-Related Work 7-Conclusion OPLAB_IM_NTU

  21. Different Layer QoS Support(Application Layer QoS Support) • Self-Admission Control measures the packet loss ratio of the first few seconds and estimate the packet loss probability • Two-way sessions • Initiated by the first received probe packet • Carried out by the called application • Relation between the loss ratio of an initial part of the call and the loss ratio of the whole duration • Initial interval increases , the points group closer around the line Y=X OPLAB_IM_NTU

  22. Different Layer QoS Support(Application Layer QoS Support) OPLAB_IM_NTU

  23. Different Layer QoS Support(blocking threshold) • denote lp : the loss ratio of an initial interval lt : the loss ratio of the total call ε: a stochastic variable , is lt - lp la : pre-established loss rate Use statistics method: Strict policy : higher risk than 10% => la-2.6% Relax policy : more than 90% => la+1.81% OPLAB_IM_NTU

  24. Different Layer QoS Support(Application Layer QoS Support) • Different kinds of calls based on the initial estimation and the final outcome OPLAB_IM_NTU

  25. Different Layer QoS Support(Application Layer QoS Support) • Advantage: • Not be loaded by new sessions when congestion • Interactive session is not disturbed by session that risks being aborted due to poor quality • Receiver may avoid starting to listen to or view a session that is likely to be rendered useless by poor throughput • Although it is much simpler to implement than feedback congestion control, it might be desirable to provide probe-based admission control at the transport layer as a generic service to all applications that might benefit from it OPLAB_IM_NTU

  26. Different Layer QoS Support(Transport Layer Service differentiation ) • Provide two generic traffic classed : Batch controlled by TCP and Streaming useprobe-based admission control • All sessions to enter the network are congestion controlled • probe-based admission control makes the aggregate of streaming sessions responsive to load variations by blocking new sessions to prevent the load from increasing OPLAB_IM_NTU

  27. Different Layer QoS Support(Transport Layer Service differentiation ) • Fair sharing of bottleneck capacity between sessions of the two classed by choosing the admission criterion appropriately OPLAB_IM_NTU

  28. Different Layer QoS Support(Transport Layer Service differentiation ) • acceptance decision Wmax : maximum window size RTT : the round-trip time b : the number of packets acknowledged by a received ACK T0: timeout value If rpr <= rTCP , then accept the session OPLAB_IM_NTU

  29. Proof • Reference: Modeling TCP Reno Performance: A Simple Model and Its Empirical validation Yi=αi+ Wi -1 OPLAB_IM_NTU

  30. Proof Windows size Other Yi calculated (E[β]=E[W] /2) OPLAB_IM_NTU

  31. Proof Use above estimation combine E[X] and E[A] OPLAB_IM_NTU

  32. Proof B(P)=Mi/Si OPLAB_IM_NTU

  33. Proof Using L’Hopital rule, can calculate Q R is geometric distribution, so E[R] T0 (time out) is most 64T0, E(ZTO) is OPLAB_IM_NTU

  34. Proof Substituting expressions for Q,E[S],E[R] ,and E[ZTO] for B(P) Where OPLAB_IM_NTU

  35. Different Layer QoS Support(Transport Layer Service differentiation ) • An issue concerns the quality admitted streaming sessions • Session will be disturbed by new streaming session that probe the network for admission • The admitted sessions should be protected by forward error correction with error control codes to withstand the loss by the disturbing sessions • The loss estimate from the probing • can be used to calculate the appropriate level of redundancy necessary for insulting the session in this way OPLAB_IM_NTU

  36. Different Layer QoS Support(Transport Layer Service differentiation ) • Probe-based admission control can be used for multicast sessions • An admission policy based on estimation of RTTs • Require each receiver to estimate it ,for example, by means of pings to a rendezvous point • The solution is acceptable for a low arrival rate of new receivers • An admission policy independent of RTTs is preferable OPLAB_IM_NTU

  37. Different Layer QoS Support(Transport Layer remarks ) • Batch and streaming classes can’t be argued which class is better • TCP provides a lossless service where throughput variations and retransmissions lead to uncontrolled delay • probe-based admission control allows the sender to use a fixed amount of network capacity, and thereby controls delay and loss while introducing uncontrollable blocking • Incorporated in the datagram congestion control OPLAB_IM_NTU

  38. Different Layer QoS Support(network support for service differentiation) • Scheduling in the network can provide further differentiate services • allow an operator to control the blocking probability for the streaming class • control the average throughput for the batch class OPLAB_IM_NTU

  39. Different Layer QoS Support(Queuing system) Denote that Cl: link capacity Cb: for elastic batch transfers Cs : for admission controlled streams OPLAB_IM_NTU

  40. Different Layer QoS Support(Queuing system) • A streaming session is admitted if there is enough capacity available for its probe within link capacity • There must be a single target loss level for the admission of all hosts using the service class • no need to consider TCP fairness in the admission decision because of classes separated by scheduling OPLAB_IM_NTU

  41. Different Layer QoS Support(Advantage of network support) • Ongoing streaming sessions are disturbed by neither batch transfers nor probes • The operator can control the blocking probability for streaming sessions by adjusting the capacity allocation, Cs • The delay may be reduced by configuring short buffers for streaming class • Multicast admission control OPLAB_IM_NTU

  42. Today’s Agenda 1-Introduction About Quality of Service 2-Probe-Based Admission Control 3-Different Layer QoS Support 4-Comparison of the Proposals 5-Deployment and Operator 6-Related Work 7-Conclusion OPLAB_IM_NTU

  43. Comparison of the Proposals • A bottleneck link with 10Mb/s capacity shared between batch and streaming • 10 batch sessions and peak rate limited to 500kb/s • Streaming sessions consist of a two-state Markov chain (on and off) with 250 kb/s in the on state ,with an average rate of 100 kb/s • Probing time is 2s at the peak rate • Corresponding to 976 probe packets of 64 bytes • Each case has been run 30 times OPLAB_IM_NTU

  44. Comparison of the Proposals OPLAB_IM_NTU

  45. Comparison of the Proposals(Results) • (no blocking) streaming sessions are freely admitted and experience severe packet loss • (Self) The loss in streaming sessions has been reduced at the offer expense of blocking • (TP1) bounds the loss through the formula for equivalent TCP throughput • (TP2) provides a loss target, which is met, but blocking goes up and TCP is favored • (TP+NP) network support allows the blocking to be controlled in relation to the TCP share of the link capacity OPLAB_IM_NTU

  46. Comparison of the Proposals(Results) • Self-admission control is useful since the admitted streaming sessions meet the target of at most 1 percent loss • Streaming load and particular decision level can balance between streams and batch classes • Provide two generic service rather than each streaming application having its own admission control OPLAB_IM_NTU

  47. Today’s Agenda 1-Introduction About Quality of Service 2-Probe-Based Admission Control 3-Different Layer QoS Support 4-Comparison of the Proposals 5-Deployment and Operator 6-Related Work 7-Conclusion OPLAB_IM_NTU

  48. Deployment and OperatorApplication • End to end argument applied to QoS is the separation of roles between network operation and host function • Incognizant of the differentiation at the transport layer • Admission control at the application layer • Self-admission is incorporated into streaming and conversational application without standardization • Weakness: can’t mandate and reinforced by provider • Admission control protect user establishing session during congestion OPLAB_IM_NTU

  49. Deployment and OperatorTransport • Transport layer differentiation provide two service classes: batch and streaming • Large batch is efficiently made at a fixed rate • Small batch could be inefficient because of substantial probe phase • Admission control decision policy • Datagram congestion control • Operators enforce the traffic entering networks is congestion controlled by hosts OPLAB_IM_NTU

  50. Deployment and OperatorTransport • Operator’s role is further affected by QoS because of service class differentiation in the network • Operators manage the capacity allocation for the streaming class • Allocation to control the blocking probabilities of the link • If to keep blocking probability below a declared value, users need to pay charge for guarantee • Hosts manage the admission decisions of session • Decisions are time critical, fully distributed, good scaling • Network control blocking probabilities of the link, occurring less frequently than admission decision OPLAB_IM_NTU

More Related