performance evaluation of ef admit draft gunn tsvwg ef admit evaluation 00 with updates l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Performance Evaluation of EF-Admit draft-gunn-tsvwg-ef-admit-evaluation-00 with updates PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Performance Evaluation of EF-Admit draft-gunn-tsvwg-ef-admit-evaluation-00 with updates

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 11

Performance Evaluation of EF-Admit draft-gunn-tsvwg-ef-admit-evaluation-00 with updates - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 261 Views
  • Uploaded on

Performance Evaluation of EF-Admit draft-gunn-tsvwg-ef-admit-evaluation-00 with updates. J. Gunn Computer Sciences Corporation R. Lichtenfels National Communications System D. Garbin D. Masi Noblis P. McGregor Nyquetek. Outline. Background / Motivation EF-ADMIT

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Performance Evaluation of EF-Admit draft-gunn-tsvwg-ef-admit-evaluation-00 with updates' - MikeCarlo


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.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
performance evaluation of ef admit draft gunn tsvwg ef admit evaluation 00 with updates

Performance Evaluation of EF-Admitdraft-gunn-tsvwg-ef-admit-evaluation-00with updates

J. Gunn

Computer Sciences Corporation

R. Lichtenfels

National Communications System

D. Garbin

D. Masi

Noblis

P. McGregor

Nyquetek

outline
Outline
  • Background / Motivation
  • EF-ADMIT
  • Scenarios/Assumptions
    • (updates since -00)
  • Results
    • (updates since -00)
  • Conclusions
  • Next Steps
background motivation
Background / Motivation
  • EF-ADMIT proposed as a new DSCP to distinguish real time traffic subject to strict CAC from real time traffic subject to weak or no CAC
  • Interested in protecting ETS calls (as described in IEPREP) under severe congestion
    • Sustained high traffic
    • Extensive network failure
  • ETS calls can be subject to CAC (and thus can use EF-ADMIT) even when economic concerns mean that many “normal” calls are subject to weaker (or no) CAC.
  • How well can EF-ADMIT protect the ETS “strict CAC” calls when network is overloaded?
2 ef 2 queue model
2 EF - 2 Queue Model

Policer 1

EF-ADMIT: Strict CAC Voice

Priority

Queue

EF: Voice

Policer 2

Line Transmission

256 Kb, 1.5 Mb, 45 Mb

Baseline

AF1: Video

CBWFQ

AF2: Data

BE: Data

EF = Expedited Forwarding (e.g., VoIP)

AF1 = Assured Forwarding (Video)

AF2 = Assured Forwarding (signaling)

BE = Best Effort (Other Data)

CBWFQ = Class Based Weighted Fair Queuing

2 ef 1 queue model
2 EF - 1 Queue Model

Policer 1

EF-ADMIT: Strict CAC Voice

Priority

Queue

EF: Voice

Policer 2

Line Transmission

256 Kb, 1.5 Mb, 45 Mb

Baseline

AF1: Video

CBWFQ

AF2: Data

BE: Data

EF = Expedited Forwarding (e.g., VoIP)

AF1 = Assured Forwarding (Video)

AF2 = Assured Forwarding (signaling)

BE = Best Effort (Other Data)

CBWFQ = Class Based Weighted Fair Queuing

scenarios assumptions 01 version
Scenarios/Assumptions (-01 version)
  • Access line speeds- 256 Kb, 1.5 Mb, 45 Mb
  • EF-ADMIT traffic is small compared to EF traffic (10% of base EF)
  • Baseline traffic mix includes EF/EF-ADMIT (Voice), AF1 (Video), AF2 (Data) and BE (Data)
    • Network Control traffic modeled as AF2- and is protected by EF policing
    • Baseline (overall) approx 80% utilization for 256 Kb, 1.5 Mb
    • Baseline (overall) approx 55% utilization for 45Mbps
  • 10X Overload applies to all except the EF-ADMIT and AF2 traffic
  • Policing
    • Regular” EF policed to approx 50% of line speed,
    • No policing on AF and BE
  • Primary Scenarios (for each speed)
    • 1EF, 1Q (current operation)
    • 2EF, 1Q
    • 2EF, 2Q
  • Secondary Scenarios- only for higher speeds
    • Mix Voice and Video in the EF-ADMIT stream
256 kbps results
256 Kbps Results
  • Delay and jitter for EF not relevant because only 10% of the packets for each call get through
  • For EF-ADMIT, delay is better for 2Q (14 ms vs. 23 ms), jitter is about the same (50 ms)
  • Drop rate almost identical for 1Q and 2Q

10 calls

1 call

10 calls, each getting 10 %

1 call, getting 100 %

1 5 mbps results
1.5 Mbps Results
  • Delay and jitter for EF not relevant because only 15% of the packets for each call get through
  • For EF-ADMIT, delay and jitter are both below 10 ms, for both 1Q and 2Q
  • Introducing EF-ADMIT video worsens delay and jitter for both EF and EF ADMIT- slightly worse for EF-ADMIT with1Q (5ms delay, 16 ms jitter)
  • Drop rate almost identical for 1Q and 2Q

EF - 50 calls

EF- ADMIT -1 call

50 calls, each getting small %

1 call, getting 100 %

45 mbps results
45 Mbps Results
  • Delay and jitter for EF not relevant because only small % of the packets for each call get through
  • For EF-ADMIT, delay and jitter are both below 1 ms, for both 1Q and 2Q
  • Introducing EF-ADMIT video has little effect on delay and jitter for both EF and EF ADMIT
  • Drop rate almost identical for 1Q and 2Q

1000 calls, each getting small %

10 call, each getting 100%

conclusions
Conclusions
  • Simulation and analytical results confirm the expectations described in draft-ietf-tsvwg-admitted-realtime-dscp-00
    • When EF traffic is properly policed, the EF-ADMIT traffic is protected from the effects (dropping, delay, jitter) of a major overload of EF (and AF, etc.) traffic
    • When EF traffic is properly policed, the 1Q and 2Q cases perform very similarly if all the and EF and EF-ADMIT is Voice (short packets)
    • When video (long packets) traffic is introduced to the EF-ADMIT traffic, delay and jitter suffer at 1.5 Mbps- little impact at 45 Mbps
  • These results demonstrate significant value in preserving EF-ADMIT performance even when overload significant causes degradation of EF performance.
  • In the context of essential network services for disaster response (as addressed in IEPREP), we conclude that EF-ADMIT can help ensure that disaster response service is assured under all circumstances.
next steps
Next Steps
  • Model other arrival rate and packet size distributions, for sensitivity
  • Evaluate the implications of mixing voice signaling traffic with voice bearer traffic in the same PHBs.
  • Address how to best to ensure video capabilities for disaster recovery under all circumstances.
  • Address disaster recovery data services, particularly in terms of how well the needs can be met by appropriate assignments within the framework of the existing AF classes.
  • Corroborate the event simulation and analysis results with a prototype implementation of the model configuration in the laboratory and testing the performance for the various scenarios.
  • Investigate sensitivity to variations in policing
  • Thank you for comments which contributed to -01 and Next Steps
    • Fred Baker
    • Ken Carlberg