Round Robin vs. Fair Queuing Internet Sharing Among Multiple Applications Group 1(b) Gilse George z3412060 Nashid Farhad z3423251 Taimur Ali Khan z3214258

Scenario Computer applications that rely on network File Transfer, P2P, Web Browser, Audio/Video Streaming, Conferencing, Updating All the applications can run simultaneously and need access to the network/Internet This access needs to managed

Scenario (cont.) Why? Users now-a-days tend to do multitasking. Application running in background seldom access the Internet (e.g. checking for update, extension etc.) More and more application are becoming Internet depended (e.g. requires Internet access to function properly)

Simulation Specifics Discrete Time Simulation Visual C++ 2010 On/Off sources with Poisson Arrival Packet size: Exponentially distributed around the mean Inter-arrival time: exponentially distributed around the mean On/Off Time: exponentially distributed

Simulation Specifics (cont.) Internet Speed Run simulation for varying speed Result Effective BW Packet Loss (e.g. packets dropped in a finite queue) Average time of packets in system (excluding dropped packets)

Simulation Specifics (cont.) Queue size = 1000 packets 4 sources: Application Type Avg. Packet Size BW requirement File Transfer(FTP) Balanced 512 bytes Available Browser (HTTP) Bursty 660 bytes Audio (VoIP- G.711) Smooth 218 bytes 64kbps Video (mpeg) 1360 bytes 1Mbps

Effective Bandwidth

Average Packet Time (ms)

Packet Loss 0.1 Mbps 0.05 Mbps Round Robin Fair Queuing Audio 0% 6% Video 27% 26% 63% 62%

Conclusion As BW becomes less Fair Queuing gives slightly better performance. As BW becomes less Fair Queuing gives less delay than Round Robin. Fair Queuing provides slightly better performance regarding packet loss.