1 / 30

Author: Polychronis Koutsakis Anukrati Gupta / Manoj Maskara

Dynamic versus Static Traffic Policing: A New Approach for Videoconference Traffic over Wireless Cellular Networks. Author: Polychronis Koutsakis Anukrati Gupta / Manoj Maskara CS: 6204 - Mobile Computing, Fall 2009. Outline. Introduction Policing Mechanism System Model Model Definition

pepper
Download Presentation

Author: Polychronis Koutsakis Anukrati Gupta / Manoj Maskara

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. Dynamic versus Static Traffic Policing: A New Approach for Videoconference Traffic over Wireless Cellular Networks Author: Polychronis Koutsakis Anukrati Gupta / Manoj Maskara CS: 6204 - Mobile Computing, Fall 2009

  2. Outline • Introduction • Policing Mechanism • System Model • Model Definition • Channel Error Model • The Token Bucket – Basic, Dual & Triple • Jumping Window • Sliding Window • Conclusions

  3. Introduction…1/2 • Video traffic is becoming a major portion of the traffic carried over wired and wireless networks • Video traffic calls for: • New sets of control procedures • Strict Qos requirements • Strict packet delay requirements • Strict packet dropping requirements • Video traffic is modeled using various statistical models like – lognormal, Gamma, and a hybrid Gamma/lognormal distribution • Videoconference traffic needs to be modeled differently – reason?

  4. Introduction…2/2 • Inherent Characteristics of Videoconference – very high autocorrelation • Video coding standards – H.261, H.262, H.263, H.264 • Latest version H.264 • Widely used H.263 – Compresses moving picture component of audio/video services at low bit rates. “This is the first work in the literature which addresses the problem of modeling single H.263 videoconference traces” – Koutsakis

  5. Policing Mechanism…1/2 Static and Dynamic – based on traffic flow • Token Bucket and its variations • Jumping Window • Sliding Window (Moving Window)

  6. Policing Mechanism…2/2 • Focus on traffic control mechanism at the entrance of the system to prevent congestion • Implemented all three traffic policing mechanism and proposed modification to improve performance • Used GBAR process (gamma distribution)

  7. MSC Parking Lot BS BS MS MS MS MS MS MS System Model….1/3 • The study focuses on one cell of the network, also called picocell • Source terminals are spatially dispersed and share a radio channel • Radio channel connects the source terminals to the fixed Base Station (BS) • The BS allocates channel resources, delivers feedback information, and provides an interface to the Mobile Switching Center (MSC) • The MSC provides access to the fixed network infrastructure

  8. System Model….2/3 • Downlink wireless channel (20Mbps) – BS to MS • Divided into time frames of equal length • Each frame has a duration of 12ms and 566 information slots • Information slot contains 1 fixed length packet with a header & information • 3% or 16 slots (control Interval) of the bandwidth is used for uplink

  9. System Model….3/3 • The information Interval of the frame = 19.43 Mbps needs efficient traffic policing mechanism • Used computer simulations to study the performance of the traffic policing mechanisms • Used C programming language to conduct simulations • Each simulation point is the result of an average of 10 independent runs

  10. Model Definition…1/2 • Video conference traffic is modeled using GBAR (1) model as it takes advantage of the properties of Pearson V distribution GBAR (1) model is based on following results shape parameter scale parameter

  11. Model Definition…2/2 • If Xn-1 = Ga(β, λ), and An = Be(α, β- α) and Bn = Ga(β- α, λ) , and all are mutually independent, then GBAR(1) process is defined by {Xn} where Xn = AnXn-1 + Bn Since the current value is determined by only one previous value, this is an autoregressive process of order 1

  12. Pearson V Distribution • The parameters (α, β) of the pearson V is computed using GBAR(1) mean and variance Mean = β/(α – 1) Variance = β2/[(α – 1)2 (α – 2)] • Pearson V distribution (Zn) is also known as the inverted gamma distribution which is defined as Zn = 1/ Xn

  13. Traces Used • A video stream from Office Cam • A video stream from Lecture Cam • A video stream from Parking Cam • A video stream from N3 Talk • A video stream from ARD Talk

  14. Comparison Burstiness = peak/mean

  15. Channel Error Model…1/2 15 States Markov Model Diagram

  16. Channel Error Model…2/2 • State S0 represents “good state” and all other states represents “bad states” • When channel is in S0 it can either remain in S0 or can transition to state S1 • When channel is in bad state it can transition to either the next higher state or back to state S0 based on the received packet • pgood is 0.99995 due to very strict QoS requirements

  17. Concepts to help understand Token approach • Mean rate—Also called the committed information rate (CIR), it specifies how much data can be sent or forwarded per unit time on average. • Burst size—Also called the committed burst (Bc) size, it specifies for each burst how much data can be sent within a given time without creating scheduling concerns. • Time interval—Also called the measurement interval, it specifies the amount of time in seconds per burst. mean rate = burst size / time interval

  18. Token Bucket Basic Approach Token Static Approach Conforming –> Size of Token = Packet Size Non Conforming –> Size of Token < Packet Size Packets either wait or discarded Max no. of Tokens in bucket = Size of Bucket Overflow – New incoming tokens are discarded

  19. The Dual Token Bucket Approach Proposed method of generating tokens with the use of Pearson V-based variant of the GBAR model Token Token

  20. Packet Loss Comparison Static versus Dual Token Bucket bucket size equal to the declared peak frame size of the source Increase in bucket size results in decrease in video packet dropping and the difference between the static approach and dynamic method decreases.

  21. High packet dropping - Solutions Three solutions to deal with high packet dropping rate in dual token bucket as seen in previous slide. Sol 1 - Infinite buffer size Third bucket is introduced for other two solutions Sol 2 - Use Triple Token Bucket where third bucket is of fixed size Sol 3 - Use Triple Token Bucket where third bucket is of dynamic nature whose size varies depending on source transmission rate – DYNAMIC

  22. The Triple Token Bucket Approach All 3 buckets are connected in parallel Behavior of Bucket 1 & Bucket 2 is similar to Dual Bucket Scheme. When Bucket 2 is full, it start marking packets with “non-conform”

  23. Properties of 3rd Bucket • Responsible for source packet drop • Token rate = average size of “token frame” • Token frame is equal to the average no. of token needed in each video frame for the source to lose only 0.01% of packets • In case of dynamic bucket size varies: • If source transmit at higher rate than its mean, size of bucket is reduced in order to prevent long overuse of network resources by malicious users • If source transmit at lower rate, size of bucket is increased to help accommodate anticipated bursts

  24. Function of Buckets in Different Approaches

  25. Jumping Window • Size of window is of fixed length T, placed side by side through time • During a window only K bytes (or packets) are submitted by the source to the network • Source transmits > K bytes = Packets are dropped/marked non conformed • Mechanism is implemented using Token Counter • In each new window, packet counter starts with initial value of zero

  26. Modification in Jumping Window • If less than K bytes are transmitted within a window then token counter is not set to 0 • It starts with an initial value equal to the remaining tokens Jumping Window Token Bucket Reason: Significantly larger window size (40 frames, 3.2 seconds)

  27. Sliding Window • Similar to Jumping Window • Difference – Each video frame size is remembered for the width of exactly one window, starting with specific video frame and ending T frames later • This mechanism can be interpreted as a window which steadily moves along the time axis, with the requirement that the frame size of T frames are stored for the duration of one window • Complexity is directly related to the window size. • Strictest bandwidth enforcement. > Jumping Window

  28. Modification of Sliding Window To implement more dynamic policy: in case of less than K bytes transmitted by the source within one window W, the tokens left in the bucket are not discarded, but they are added to the token bucket of the next window (W+1)

  29. Conclusion • Dynamic approach provides significantly better results in policing the burstiness of video traffic sources than static traffic policing mechanisms • Proposed triple token bucket scheme, which showed the best performance • Showed results using various example and studied the Token Bucket, Jumping Window and Sliding Window schemes • Low paying users – Triple Token Bucket or Triple Sliding Window • High paying users – Triple Jumping Window • Token Window less complex to implement rather than Sliding Window but is more sticker. • Videoconference applications are very greedy in terms of bandwidth requirements

  30. Thanks and wish you all Good Luck for exam next week !!!

More Related