Aleksandar Kuzmanovic and Edward W. Knightly Rice Networks Group Measuring Service in Multi-Class Networks.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Hadi Goudarzi and Massoud Pedram
Advertisements

CS640: Introduction to Computer Networks Aditya Akella Lecture 20 – QoS.
Engineering Internet QoS
Abhay.K.Parekh and Robert G.Gallager Laboratory for Information and Decision Systems Massachusetts Institute of Technology IEEE INFOCOM 1992.
Estimation  Samples are collected to estimate characteristics of the population of particular interest. Parameter – numerical characteristic of the population.
Distributed Control Algorithms for Service Differentiation in Wireless Packet Networks Michael Barry, Andrew T Campbell, Andras Veres
Recent Progress on a Statistical Network Calculus Jorg Liebeherr Department of Computer Science University of Virginia.
1 Service Differentiation at Transport Layer via TCP Westwood Low- Priority (TCPW-LP) H. Shimonishi, M.Y. Sanadidi and M. Geria System Platforms Research.
The War Between Mice and Elephants LIANG GUO, IBRAHIM MATTA Computer Science Department Boston University ICNP (International Conference on Network Protocols)
The War Between Mice and Elephants Presented By Eric Wang Liang Guo and Ibrahim Matta Boston University ICNP
A Case for Relative Differentiated Services and the Proportional Differentiation Model Constantinos Dovrolis Parameswaran Ramanathan University of Wisconsin-Madison.
Rice Networks Group Aleksandar Kuzmanovic & Edward W. Knightly TCP-LP: A Distributed Algorithm for Low Priority Data Transfer.
Rice Networks Group Ph.D. Thesis Proposal Aleksandar Kuzmanovic Edge-based Inference and Control in the Internet.
Edward W. Knightly and Chengzhi Li Rice Networks Group Coordinated Scheduling: A Mechanism for Efficient Multi-Node Communication.
End-to-End Analysis of Distributed Video-on-Demand Systems Padmavathi Mundur, Robert Simon, and Arun K. Sood IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, February.
CS 268: Lecture 15/16 (Packet Scheduling) Ion Stoica April 8/10, 2002.
Generalized Processing Sharing (GPS) Is work conserving Is a fluid model Service Guarantee –GPS discipline can provide an end-to-end bounded- delay service.
ACN: IntServ and DiffServ1 Integrated Service (IntServ) versus Differentiated Service (Diffserv) Information taken from Kurose and Ross textbook “ Computer.
Katz, Stoica F04 EECS 122: Introduction to Computer Networks Packet Scheduling and QoS Computer Science Division Department of Electrical Engineering and.
Rice Networks Group Aleksandar Kuzmanovic Edward W. Knightly Rice University R. Les Cottrell SLAC/SCS-Network Monitoring.
CSE 401N Multimedia Networking-2 Lecture-19. Improving QOS in IP Networks Thus far: “making the best of best effort” Future: next generation Internet.
1 TCP-LP: A Distributed Algorithm for Low Priority Data Transfer Aleksandar Kuzmanovic, Edward W. Knightly Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering.
Distributed-Dynamic Capacity Contracting: A congestion pricing framework for Diff-Serv Murat Yuksel and Shivkumar Kalyanaraman Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute,
School of Information Technologies IP Quality of Service NETS3303/3603 Weeks
1 Proportional differentiations provisioning Packet Scheduling & Buffer Management Yang Chen LANDER CSE Department SUNY at Buffalo.
Tiziana FerrariQuality of Service for Remote Control in the High Energy Physics Experiments CHEP, 07 Feb Quality of Service for Remote Control in.
Packet Scheduling From Ion Stoica. 2 Packet Scheduling  Decide when and what packet to send on output link -Usually implemented at output interface 1.
Fair Real-time Traffic Scheduling over Wireless Local Area Networks Insik Shin Joint work with M. Adamou, S. Khanna, I. Lee, and S. Zhou Dept. of Computer.
Alok Shriram and Jasleen Kaur Presented by Moonyoung Chung Empirical Evaluation of Techniques for Measuring Available Bandwidth.
CSE QoS in IP. CSE Improving QOS in IP Networks Thus far: “making the best of best effort”
QOS مظفر بگ محمدی دانشگاه ایلام. 2 Why a New Service Model? Best effort clearly insufficient –Some applications need more assurances from the network.
CS640: Introduction to Computer Networks Aditya Akella Lecture 20 - Queuing and Basics of QoS.
Company LOGO Provision of Multimedia Services in based Networks Colin Roby CMSC 681 Fall 2007.
Providing Delay Guarantees in Bluetooth Rachid Ait Yaiz and Geert Heijenk International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems Workshops (ICDCSW’03)
CONGESTION CONTROL and RESOURCE ALLOCATION. Definition Resource Allocation : Process by which network elements try to meet the competing demands that.
Link Scheduling & Queuing COS 461: Computer Networks
ACN: RED paper1 Random Early Detection Gateways for Congestion Avoidance Sally Floyd and Van Jacobson, IEEE Transactions on Networking, Vol.1, No. 4, (Aug.
Huirong Fu and Edward W. Knightly Rice Networks Group Aggregation and Scalable QoS: A Performance Study.
11 Experimental and Analytical Evaluation of Available Bandwidth Estimation Tools Cesar D. Guerrero and Miguel A. Labrador Department of Computer Science.
Admission Control and Scheduling for QoS Guarantees for Variable-Bit-Rate Applications on Wireless Channels I-Hong Hou P.R. Kumar University of Illinois,
9.7 Other Congestion Related Issues Outline Queuing Discipline Avoiding Congestion.
Uplink Scheduling with Quality of Service in IEEE Networks Juliana Freitag and Nelson L. S. da Fonseca State University of Campinas, Sao Paulo,
Opportunistic Traffic Scheduling Over Multiple Network Path Coskun Cetinkaya and Edward Knightly.
Florida State UniversityZhenhai Duan1 BCSQ: Bin-based Core Stateless Queueing for Scalable Support of Guaranteed Services Zhenhai Duan Karthik Parsha Department.
CS640: Introduction to Computer Networks Aditya Akella Lecture 20 - Queuing and Basics of QoS.
V. Fodor and Gy. Dan, KTH - Marholmen 2002 End-to-end control for audio-visual communication Viktoria Fodor and György Dán Laboratory for Communication.
1 Capacity Dimensioning Based on Traffic Measurement in the Internet Kazumine Osaka University Shingo Ata (Osaka City Univ.)
PCP: Efficient Endpoint Congestion Control NSDI, 2006 Thomas Anderson, Andrew Collins, Arvind Krishnamurthy and John Zahorjan University of Washington.
T. S. Eugene Ngeugeneng at cs.rice.edu Rice University1 COMP/ELEC 429 Introduction to Computer Networks Lecture 18: Quality of Service Slides used with.
Scheduling Determines which packet gets the resource. Enforces resource allocation to each flows. To be “Fair”, scheduling must: –Keep track of how many.
T. S. Eugene Ngeugeneng at cs.rice.edu Rice University1 COMP/ELEC 429/556 Introduction to Computer Networks Weighted Fair Queuing Some slides used with.
Chengzhi Li and Edward W. Knightly Schedulability Criterion and Performance Analysis of Coordinated Schedulers.
CprE 458/558: Real-Time Systems (G. Manimaran)1 CprE 458/558: Real-Time Systems Energy-aware QoS packet scheduling.
A Theory of QoS for Wireless I-Hong Hou Vivek Borkar P.R. Kumar University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
Courtesy Piggybacking: Supporting Differentiated Services in Multihop Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Wei LiuXiang Chen Yuguang Fang WING Dept. of ECE University.
Providing QoS in IP Networks
Scheduling for QoS Management. Engineering Internet QoS2 Outline  What is Queue Management and Scheduling?  Goals of scheduling  Fairness (Conservation.
04/02/08 1 Packet Scheduling IT610 Prof. A. Sahoo KReSIT.
Khiem Lam Jimmy Vuong Andrew Yang
Team: Aaron Sproul Patrick Hamilton
QoS & Queuing Theory CS352.
Measuring Service in Multi-Class Networks
TCP-LP: A Distributed Algorithm for Low Priority Data Transfer
Columbia University in the city of New York
Provision of Multimedia Services in based Networks
Scheduling Algorithms in Broad-Band Wireless Networks
CIS679: Two Planes and Int-Serv Model
EECS 122: Introduction to Computer Networks Packet Scheduling and QoS
کنترل جریان امیدرضا معروضی.
Presentation transcript:

Aleksandar Kuzmanovic and Edward W. Knightly Rice Networks Group Measuring Service in Multi-Class Networks

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 Background l QoS services –SLA guaranteed rate  Ex. Class X serviced at minimum rate R –Relative performance  Ex. Class X has strict priority over class Y –Statistical service  Ex. P(class X pkt. Delay>100ms)<.001 l QoS mechanisms –Priority queues  Rate-based, delay- based... –Policing  Rate limiting... –Over-engineering  Just add more bandwidth... Need:Tools for network clients to assess the networks QoS capabilities

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 Inverse QoS Problem l Is a class rate limited? l What is the inter-class relationship? –Fair/weighted fair/strict priority l Is resource borrowing fully allowed or not? l Is the service’s upper bound identical to its lower bound? l What are the service’s parameters?

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 Applications - Network Example Providers reluctant to divulge precise QoS policy (if any...) l SLA validation for VPNs –Is the SLA fulfilled? l Capacity planning –What is the relationship among classes? l Edge-based admission control [CK00] and implementation [SSYK01]

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 Performance Monitoring and Resource Management l Single WEB server –CPU resource sharing –Listen queue differentiation –Admission control l Distributed WEB server –Load balancing l Internet Data Center –Machine migration Goal:Estimate a class’ net “guaranteed rate”

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 “Off-Line” Solution is Simple l Consider a router with unknown QoS mechanisms

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 “On-Line” Case: Operational Network l Undesirable to disrupt on-going services –High rate probes to detect inter-class relationships would degrade performance l Impossible to force other classes to be idle –… to detect policers

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 System Model and Problem Formulation l Two stage server –Non-work conserving elements –Multi-class scheduler l Observations –Arrival and departure times –Class ID –Packet size

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 Determine... l Infer the service discipline –Most likely hypothesis among WFQ, EDF and SP l Detect the existence of non-work conserving elements –Rate limiters (ex. leaky bucket policers) l Estimate the system parameters –WFQ guaranteed rates, EDF deadlines, rate limiter values

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 Remaining Outline l Inter-class Resource Sharing Theory l Empirical Arrival and Service Models l MLE of Parameters l EDF/WFQ/SP Hypothesis Testing l Simulation Results and Conclusions

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 Theoretical Tool: Statistical Service Envelopes [QK99] l General statistical char. for a (virtual) minimally backlogged flow l Flows receive additional service beyond min rate –Function of other flow demand –Function of scheduler l General characterization of inter-class resource sharing l Framework for admission control for EDF/WFQ/SP

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 l Inter-class theory l Key technique: –Passively monitor arrivals and services at edges –Devise hypothesis tests to jointly:  Detect most likely hypothesis  Estimate unknown parameters Strategy

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 Empirical Arrival Model l Envelopes characterize arrivals as a function of interval length –Statistical traffic envelope [QK99] l Empirical envelope - measure first two moments of arrivals over multiple time scales time t + It E *( I ) = 3 Goal: assuming Gaussian distribution for B

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 Empirical Service Model l A real-world paradigm for statistical service envelope l Observe: Service can be measured only when packets are backlogged

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 Empirical Service Distributions l For each class and time scale –Expected service distributions –Service measures (data) l Empirical service distributions WFQ (400 ms) SP (400 ms)

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 Parameter Estimation and Scheduler Inference l GLRT for each time scale l Under MLE parameters for each scheduler l Choose most likely scheduler l Apply majority rule over all time scales

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 EDF/WFQ Testing l Correctness ratio True WFQ  94% True EDF  100% Importance of time scales l Short time scales –Fluid vs. packet model l Long time scales –Ratio of delay shift and time scale decreases as time scale increases (d1=25ms)

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 Measurable Regions l What if there is no traffic in particular class? l What traffic load “allows” inferences? l Region where we are able to estimate true value within 5% l Typical utilization should be > 62% for 1.5 Mbps link l Otherwise, active probing required

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 Conclusions l Framework for clients of multi-class services to assess a system’s core QoS mechanisms –Scheduler type –Estimate parameters (both w-c and n-w-c) l General multiple time-scale traffic and service model to characterize a broad set of behaviors within a unified framework

Aleksandar Kuzmanovic and Edward W. Knightly Rice Networks Group Measuring Service in Multi-Class Networks

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 Ongoing Work l Unknown cross-traffic –Cannot monitor all systems inputs/outputs –Treat cross-traffic statistics as another unknown l Web servers –Evaluation of the framework in a single web server through trace driven simulations –Capacity is statistically characterized

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 WFQ Parameter Estimation l Class 1: flows l Class 2: flows l Large windows improve confidence level –T=2sec: 95% in 11% of true value –T=10sec: 95% in 1.4% of true value  Flow level dynamics & non- stationarities must be considered

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 Rate Limited Class State Detection l Can include parameter r in service envelope equations for each class Importance of time scales l Example –Class based fair queuing –C=1.5Mbps, r=1Mbps l Probability decreases with time scale  higher errors when measuring multi-level leaky-buckets

Kuzmanovic & Knightly | Rice Networks Group | INFOCOM 2001 Generalized Likelihood Ratio Test l Detection with unknowns l Note: we do not find a single value of that maximizes likelihood ratio l Under mild conditions (as ), GLRT is Uniformly Most Powerful (maximizes the probability of detection)