Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 5 June 2009
Accepted 4 February 2010
Keywords:
Quality of service
Differentiated services
Priority queue
Finite capacity
Performance evaluation
a b s t r a c t
This paper studies a two-class priority queue in order to model a DiffServ router with Expedited Forwarding Per-Hop Behavior for high-priority trafc. Normally, queueing models assume innite queue
capacity but in a DiffServ router the capacity for high-priority trafc is often small to prevent this trafc
from monopolizing the output link and hence causing starvation of other trafc. The presented model
takes the exact (nite) high-priority queue capacity into account and introduces a framework for queue
management algorithms, enabling determination of high-priority packet loss and its inuence on the
performance of the system. Analytical formulas for system content and packet delay of each trafc class
are determined. Numerical examples indicate the necessity of modelling the high-priority queue as nite
in order to accurately capture performance in a DiffServ environment.
2010 Elsevier GmbH. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction
The huge difference between the quality of service (QoS)
demands for real-time trafc ows and data trafc ows is often
neglected in packet-based telecommunication networks, such as
the Internet. Real-time trafc, such as multimedia streams, can
often endure some packet loss but requires low delays and/or low
delay jitter. Data trafc benets from low packet loss, hence avoiding retransmissions, but has less stringent delay characteristics.
In the nodes (routers, etc.) of the network, packets typically
have to wait before being transmitted to the next node. In each
node a buffer is present in order to preserve these packets. Generally packets are transmitted in order of arrival with acceptable
QoS, because the Internet is overprovisioned. However, when bandwidth becomes scarcer (wireless links, future Internet) we are
forced to handle packets smarter in order to achieve acceptable
QoS. One of these smarter approaches, the DiffServ architecture
for Internet Protocol [1,2] is successfully implemented in corporate
networks and is debated on as one of the possible approaches to
QoS in the future Internet. This approach classies packets according to their QoS requirements. By basing the order in which packets
are transmitted on class-dependent priority rules, QoS can be optimized over all trafc classes.
This paper studies a queueing system with a single-server serving two queues, one per priority class, and a priority scheduling
0 n .
(1)
A probability generating function (pgf) is the power series representation of a pmf. It is dened as
X(z) = E[z x ] =
x(n)z n .
(2)
n=0
Note that E[.] denotes the expected value (mean) operator and that
X(1) = 1. All moments (mean, variance, etc.) of a random variable x
can be calculated by means of the moment-generating property of
its pgf. For instance, the mean value of x is determined by
E[x] =
nx(n) = X (1).
(3)
n=0
191
pmfs and pgfs are denoted by ai (n) and Ai (z) respectively. The mean
number of class-i arrivals per slot equals:
i = E[ai,k ] = Ai (1).
(4)
(5)
= Pr[e1,k = p|u1,k = n]
=
(6)
m=p
192
class-1 system content, delay and packet loss ratio. Next, the class-1
idle/busy periods are determined enabling use of known formulas on vacation systems in the nal subsection, in order to obtain
class-2 system content and delay.
3.1. Class-1 performance
The class-1 queue is not inuenced by class-2 packets and can
be analyzed as if it were the only queue in the system. From [9]
and adapting to the notation used in this paper, this produces the
following formulas. Relating the system content at the beginning
of slots k and k + 1 yields:
u1,k+1 = (u1,k 1)+ + e1,k .
(7)
Due to the nite queue size, the class-1 system always reaches
steady-state, a stable time-independent state. In steady-state the
system contents at the beginning of slots k and k + 1 converge to
the same (steady-state) value. This yields:
Fig. 2. Example of the delay of a class-2 packet.
the delay of a random class-i packet. The corresponding steadystate pmfs and pgfs are expressed by di (n) and Di (z), respectively.
Consider a class-1 packet. Due to the nite class-1 queue capacity,
there are at most N 1 packets to be served before the considered
packet. It thus resides in the system for at most N slots, its maximum delay bound. Because class-1 packets receive priority and
are scheduled in a FIFO manner within their class, determining the
delay of a class-1 packet is straightforward, once u1 (n) has been
calculated.
On the other hand, a class-2 packet has to give priority to class-1
packets. Hence, determining its delay is more intricate as illustrated
in Fig. 2. The (tagged) class-2 packet we study is highlighted black,
the other packets are gray. All packets are numbered according to
their class. Evidently the tagged packet is served after packets that
were already present in the system at the beginning of its arrival
slot, after class-1 packets that have effectively arrived in the same
slot and after class-2 packets that have arrived in the same slot but
before the tagged packet. Note that class-1 packets effectively arriving while the tagged packet resides in the system are served before
it as they receive priority. Arriving class-2 packets, however, join
the class-2 queue behind the tagged packet and do not contribute
to its delay. Consequently, in the example depicted in Figs. 2 and 3
packets are to be served before the tagged packet and its own service also amounts to its delay yielding a delay of four slots in this
case.
3. System analysis
We aim to express the performance measures of the system in
terms of the arrival process. The rst subsection deals with the
u1 (n)
q(p|m, n)
e1 (p|n)
(8)
i
j=0
u1 (N) =
N1
(9)
e1 (j + 1|N j)u1 (N j) + e1 (N|0)u1 (0).
j=0
u1 (j) = 1.
(10)
j=0
(11)
The class-1 packet loss ratio, the fraction of class-1 packets that is
discarded by the system, is found as
plr1 =
1 1,e
1
(12)
u1 (n)
u1 (n)
=
,
1 u1 (0)
1,e
1 n N.
(13)
Notice that the delay of a packet is at least 1 slot and at most N slots,
or equivalently that d1 (0) = 0 and d1 (n) = 0 for all n > N.
193
The server is not permanently available for class-2 trafc. Class2 packets can only be served when the class-1 queue is empty.
The class-2 queue can consequently be analyzed as a system
with server interruptions [11]. For class-2 the server is available
when the class-1 queue is empty whereas it is inaccessible (interrupted) during class-1 busy periods. In order to tackle class-2
performance, these class-1 idle and busy periods must rst be
determined.
A class-1 busy period is constituted by a number of consecutive slots with a class-1 packet occupying the server. It starts in the
slot following a slot with arrivals in an empty system and goes on
until the system is emptied. A class-1 idle period corresponds to
the number of slots between two class-1 busy periods or equivalently to a number of consecutive slots during which the system
does not contain class-1 packets. Its pgf, denoted by I1 (z), is easily found as an idle period is shifted geometrically distributed with
parameter e1 (0|0), the probability that the class-1 queue is empty
at the beginning of the next slot if it is empty in the current slot.
Thus, we have
The system is not stable for all input parameter sets as the class-2
queue has innite capacity. It is imperative that the average class-2
server availability exceeds the average number of class-2 arrivals
for the system to reach steady state. Let denote the fraction of time
during which the server is available for class-2 packets in steady
state. It is obtained as the relative mean duration of a class-1 idle
period or equivalently as the probability that the system is void of
class-1 packets. This respectively yields:
I1 (z) =
[1 e1 (0|0)]z
.
1 e1 (0|0)z
(14)
Nn+1
Rn (z) = z
(15)
m=0
N
Rm (z)e1 (m|0)
m=1
1 e1 (0|0)
(16)
The moment-generating property of this pgf enables determination of the moments of the class-1 busy period. They are expressed
in terms of derivatives of the pgfs Rn (z). These can be calculated by
solving a linear system of equations and this does not give rise to
numerical issues for the values of N in the setting under consideration.
=
I1 (1)
I1 (1) + B1 (1)
= u1 (0).
(17)
(18)
U2 (z) =
( 2 )
D2 (z) =
(19)
The moment-generating properties of these pgfs allow us to calculate all moments of the class-2 system content and packet delay.
For instance, the mean class-2 delay is derived as
E[d2 ] = D 2 (1) = 1 +
A2 (1)
22 ( 2 )
2 Se (1)
.
2( 2 )
(20)
Note the use of lHpitals rule and note the inuence of class-1
trafc on the mean class-2 delay through and the second moment
of the EST.
The mean class-2 system content can be found analogously or,
more straightforward, by means of Littles Law yielding:
E[u2 ] = 2 E[d2 ].
(21)
194
Tail Drop:
for 0 n N:
+
for 0 m N (n 1) :
q(m|m, n):=1
q(p|m, n):=0, p =
/ m
+
for m > N (n 1) :
+
q(N (n 1) |m, n):=1
+
q(p|m, n):=0, p =
/ N (n 1)
Batch Drop:
for 0 n N:
+
for 0 m N (n 1) :
q(m|m, n):=1
q(p|m, n):=0, p =
/ m
+
for m > N (n 1) :
q(0|m, n):=1
q(p|m, n) = 0, p =
/ 0
Adaptive Batch Drop:
for 0 n H:
+
for 0 m N (n 1) :
q(m|m, n):=1
q(p|m, n):=0, p =
/ m
+
for m > N (n 1) :
+
q(N (n 1) |m, n):=1
+
q(p|m, n):=0, p =
/ N (n 1)
for H + 1 n N:
+
for 0 m d N (n 1) :
q(m d|m, n):=1
q(p|m, n):=0, p =
/ md
+
for m d > N (n 1) :
q(0|m, n):=1
q(p|m, n) = 0, p =
/ 0
dened as
Ai (z) = 1 i + i z bi .
Per slot, Adaptive Batch Drop strives to drop a limited number of packets (as most real-time applications can handle a small
amount of loss, especially if smoothed over time) or all packets (as
transmitting only a few of the packets would be useless anyway).
Packets are called defective if they are accepted into the system in
a slot with more than l packet losses causing the achieved amount
of QoS to be unacceptable. Consider the slots with at least one
arrival. The goodput g is dened as the percentage of these slots
where the accepted packets are not defective. It is a measure for
the achieved QoS. Let the random variable l1 denote the number
of dropped class-1 packets in a slot in steady state. The goodput is
expressed as
g=
l
(22)
k=0
It is straightforward that
Pr[l1 = 0|a1 > 0]
N
i=1 n=0
N
i=0 n=0
q(i|i, n)
a1 (i)
u1 (n),
1 a1 (0)
(23)
a1 (i + k)
q(i|i + k, n)
u1 (n), k > 0.
1 a1 (0)
(24)
195
196
Acknowledgement
The second and third authors are Postdoctoral Fellows with
the Fund for Scientic Research, Flanders (F.W.O.-Vlaanderen), Belgium.
References
197