Native Simulation of Round-Robin Queuing

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
WHITE – Achieving Fair Bandwidth Allocation with Priority Dropping Based on Round Trip Time Name : Choong-Soo Lee Advisors : Mark Claypool, Robert Kinicki.
Advertisements

Playback-buffer Equalization For Streaming Media Using Stateless Transport Prioritization By Wai-tian Tan, Weidong Cui and John G. Apostolopoulos Presented.
AQM for Congestion Control1 A Study of Active Queue Management for Congestion Control Victor Firoiu Marty Borden.
Improving Individual Flow Performance with Multiple Queue Fair Queuing Author: Manfred Georg, Christoph Jechlitschek, Sergey Gorinsky Publisher: Quality.
Example 14.4 Queuing | 14.2 | 14.3 | 14.5 | 14.6 | 14.7 |14.8 | Background Information n Which system has the.
ACN: AVQ1 Analysis and Design of an Adaptive Virtual Queue (AVQ) Algorithm for Active Queue Managment Srisankar Kunniyur and R. Srikant SIGCOMM’01 San.
Queueing Network Model. Single Class Model Open - Infinite stream of arriving customers Closed - Finite population eg Intranet users Indistinguishable.
1 Emulating AQM from End Hosts Presenters: Syed Zaidi Ivor Rodrigues.
Shivkumar Kalyanaraman Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 1 ECSE-4670: Computer Communications Netwoks Exam 2: Solutions Time: 75 min (strictly enforced)
7/3/2015© 2007 Raymond P. Jefferis III1 Queuing Systems.
19-1 McGraw-Hill Ryerson Operations Management, 2 nd Canadian Edition, by Stevenson & Hojati Copyright © 2004 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights.
Core Stateless Fair Queueing Stoica, Shanker and Zhang - SIGCOMM 98 Rigorous fair Queueing requires per flow state: too costly in high speed core routers.
Analysis of Input Queueing More complex system to analyze than output queueing case. In order to analyze it, we make a simplifying assumption of "heavy.
Core Stateless Fair Queueing Stoica, Shanker and Zhang - SIGCOMM 98 Fair Queueing requires per flow state: too costly in high speed core routers Yet, some.
Queuing Models and Capacity Planning
Bell Labs Advanced Technologies EMEAAT Proprietary Information © 2004 Lucent Technologies1 Overview contributions for D27 Lucent Netherlands Richa Malhotra.
CSE QoS in IP. CSE Improving QOS in IP Networks Thus far: “making the best of best effort”
Management of Waiting Lines McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2012 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved.
CS433 Modeling and Simulation Lecture 13 Queueing Theory Dr. Anis Koubâa 03 May 2009 Al-Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud University.
1 Copyright © Monash University ATM Switch Design Philip Branch Centre for Telecommunications and Information Engineering (CTIE) Monash University
 Birth Death Processes  M/M/1 Queue  M/M/m Queue  M/M/m/B Queue with Finite Buffers  Results for other Queueing systems 2.
1. Performance Guarantees Introduction –by asking sources about flow behavior it is possible to construct networks that could guarantee performance for.
18 Management of Waiting Lines.
M/M/1 queue λn = λ, (n >=0); μn = μ (n>=1) λ μ λ: arrival rate
CS433 Modeling and Simulation Lecture 12 Queueing Theory Dr. Anis Koubâa 03 May 2008 Al-Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud University.
1 Queuing Systems (2). Queueing Models (Henry C. Co)2 Queuing Analysis Cost of service capacity Cost of customers waiting Cost Service capacity Total.
1 Chapters 8 Overview of Queuing Analysis. Chapter 8 Overview of Queuing Analysis 2 Projected vs. Actual Response Time.
The Impact of Active Queue Management on Multimedia Congestion Control Wu-chi Feng Ohio State University.
Packet Scheduling and Buffer Management Switches S.Keshav: “ An Engineering Approach to Networking”
Queuing Theory and Traffic Analysis Based on Slides by Richard Martin.
Multiplicative Wavelet Traffic Model and pathChirp: Efficient Available Bandwidth Estimation Vinay Ribeiro.
Packet Scheduling: SCFQ, STFQ, WF2Q Yongho Seok Contents Review: GPS, PGPS SCFQ( Self-clocked fair queuing ) STFQ( Start time fair queuing ) WF2Q( Worst-case.
Scheduling CS 218 Fall 02 - Keshav Chpt 9 Nov 5, 2003 Problem: given N packet streams contending for the same channel, how to schedule pkt transmissions?
Introduction Definition M/M queues M/M/1 M/M/S M/M/infinity M/M/S/K.
Adaptive Inverse Multiplexing for Wide-Area Wireless Networks Alex C. Snoeren MIT Laboratory for Computer Science IEEE Globecom ’99 Rio de Janeiro, December.
Analysis and Design of an Adaptive Virtual Queue (AVQ) Algorithm for AQM By Srisankar Kunniyur & R. Srikant Presented by Hareesh Pattipati.
BSnetworks.pptTKK/ComNet Research Seminar, SRPT Applied to Bandwidth Sharing Networks (to appear in Annals of Operations Research) Samuli Aalto.
Management of Waiting Lines Copyright © 2015 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent.
Courtesy Piggybacking: Supporting Differentiated Services in Multihop Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Wei LiuXiang Chen Yuguang Fang WING Dept. of ECE University.
Scheduling for QoS Management. Engineering Internet QoS2 Outline  What is Queue Management and Scheduling?  Goals of scheduling  Fairness (Conservation.
Scheduling Mechanisms Applied to Packets in a Network Flow CSC /15/03 By Chris Hare, Ricky Johnson, and Fulviu Borcan.
Improving OBS Efficiency Li, Shuo, Meiqian Wang. Eric W. M. Wong, Moshe Zukerman City University of Hong Kong 1.
McGraw-Hill/Irwin Copyright © 2009 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Chapter 18 Management of Waiting Lines.
William Stallings Data and Computer Communications
WAITING LINES AND SIMULATION
Why Is There a Need to Implement a Weighted Fair Queue?
QoS & Queuing Theory CS352.
Models of Traffic Flow 1.
Al-Imam Mohammad Ibn Saud University
Round Robin vs. Fair Queuing
Columbia University in the city of New York
Computer Network Performance Measures
QoS Guarantees introduction call admission traffic specification
Module 5: CPU Scheduling
3: CPU Scheduling Basic Concepts Scheduling Criteria
Computer Network Performance Measures
COMP60611 Fundamentals of Parallel and Distributed Systems
Native simulation of different scheduling policies
The Impact of Multihop Wireless Channel on TCP Performance
Considerations for OBSS Sharing using QLoad Element
Lecture 2 Part 3 CPU Scheduling
Queueing Theory 2008.
CSE 550 Computer Network Design
Understanding Congestion Control Mohammad Alizadeh Fall 2018
Module 5: CPU Scheduling
Waiting Line Models Waiting takes place in virtually every productive process or service. Since the time spent by people and things waiting in line is.
pathChirp Efficient Available Bandwidth Estimation
Warm Up – Monday Calculate the Redundancy of the above network.
pathChirp Efficient Available Bandwidth Estimation
Module 5: CPU Scheduling
Presentation transcript:

Native Simulation of Round-Robin Queuing Lachlan Richardson Glen Summers

What is Round-Robin Queuing? Each queue takes turns being served Remember previous Queue served Circular servicing Max-min fairness -> small or large packets, doesn’t matter. Each get their own service time?!?!?!

Context Used in Data Packet Scheduling Multiple incoming paths Effective utilization of network capacity ‘Share the load’ Equal priority for packets Possible scenario: New data channel built Requires another server, OR Round-Robin-Queuing Use existing server to process new data channel Split server processing equally

Simulation Setup Native discrete time simulation Fixed packet size Fixed server service rate 1 million packets per simulation Vary: Max packets in queue 0 <= Pr(pkts arrival) <= 1 Correlative probabilities between queues Measure: Dropped packets Draw discrete time diagram on the board OBJECTIVES: Simulate round-robin queuing Extrapolate results Find relationships

Intra-Queue probabilities equal, .3<P<.5 Same % arrival to both queues Vary Probability 3 approach 7 queue limit, these are before 50/50 limit Converge: towards 0 as queue limit increases

Intra-Queue probabilities equal, .45<P<.55 Around 50/50 line Stable/unstable

Intra-Queue probabilities equal, .6<P<.9 % above sum 50/50 (=1) Remainder = constant value. EG 60 – 50 = 10 (GREEN LINE) Converges to const. value

Varying queue probabilities, Sum(P) = 1 Interesting -> closely related Approach 1% pkt loss @ 18 queue limit CONVERGES

Varying queue probabilities, Sum(P) = .9 Biggest difference = least loss -> BLUE!!! 85/05 GREEN = WORST,

Conclusion Sum of probabilities should be kept less than 1 for a stable system Having a large difference in probabilities between 2 queues is not a concern Increasing queue limit decreases packet loss exponentially, however would increase the time packets spend in the system Adding a second queue to a server with round robin scheduling works well as long as the P of arrival to each queue is kept less than .5 As the P of arrivals approach .5, ensure there is adequate queue lengths Largely different probabilities between 2 queues: Stability increases!!!!