SlideShare a Scribd company logo

qos-f05.ppt

Download as PPT, PDF
S
SahithiSahithiD

1. The document discusses quality of service (QoS) mechanisms in computer networks. It describes the differences between best effort service and QoS, which aims to provide guarantees for bandwidth, latency, and jitter. 2. The document outlines two main QoS architectures - Integrated Services (IntServ) which provides per-flow reservations and Differentiated Services (DiffServ) which uses traffic classes. It also discusses resource reservation using leaky and token bucket algorithms. 3. RSVP is described as the signaling protocol used to establish per-flow state through PATH and RESV messages. It supports different reservation styles like fixed, shared explicit, and wildcard filters to efficiently share resources among senders.

Internet
1 of 83
Download to read offline
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
1 CS 552 Computer Networks Quality Of Service Richard Martin Credit slides by B. Nath, I. Stoica
2 Outline • What is Quality of Service • Basic mechanisms – Leaky and token buckets • Integrated Services (IntServ) • Differentiated Services (DiffServ) • Economics and Social factors facing QoS • QoS Vs. Over Provisioning
3 Best Effort vs. QoS • Best Effort: • You get a link to the Internet with at most B bits/sec. • If you don’t like it, switch to another provider. • Quality of Service (QoS) – We provide you some kind of guarantees for: • Bandwidth • Latency • Jitter – I.e., network is engineered to provide some Quality beyond “Not to exceed B bits/s”
4 QoS’s Quest The Holy Grail of computer networking is to design a network that has the flexibility and low cost of the Internet, yet offers the end-to- end quality-of-service guarantees of the telephone network. --S. Keshav
5 Two Styles of QoS • Worse-case – Provide bandwidth/delay/jitter guarantee to every packet – E.g., “hard real time” • Average-case – Provide bandwidth/delay/jitter guarantee over many packets – Statistical in nature – E.g. “Soft real time”
6 Resource Reservation: Example Router Router Src Dest 4 Mbps available 6 Mbps available 10 Mbps available Case 1: Source attempts to connect to destination, and attempts to reserve 4 Mbps for the connection Result: Connection accepted. There is enough bandwidth available. Available link bandwidths updated. Case 2: Source attempts to connect to destination, and attempts to reserve 5 Mbps for the connection Result: Failure. There is not enough bandwidth available on one of the links.
7 Resource Reservation (cont’d) • Once a connection is accepted, the host must use only the amount of resources reserved. It may not use more than that. • What if the host is malicious and attempts to use more network resources than it reserved?
8 Leaky Bucket • Used in conjunction with resource reservation to police the host’s reservation • At the host-network interface, allow packets into the network at a constant rate • Packets may be generated in a bursty manner, but after they pass through the leaky bucket, they enter the network evenly spaced
9 Leaky Bucket: Analogy Leaky Bucket Network Packets from host
10 Leaky Bucket (cont’d) • The leaky bucket is a “traffic shaper”: It changes the characteristics of packet stream • Traffic shaping makes more manageable and more predictable • Usually the network tells the leaky bucket the rate at which it may send packets when the connection begins • Polices the average rate
11 Leaky Bucket: Doesn’t allow bursty transmissions • In some cases, we may want to allow short bursts of packets to enter the network without smoothing them out • For this purpose we use a token bucket, which is a modified leaky bucket
12 Token Bucket • The bucket holds tokens instead of packets • Tokens are generated and placed into the token bucket at a constant rate • When a packet arrives at the token bucket, it is transmitted if there is a token available. Otherwise it is buffered until a token becomes available. • The token bucket has a fixed size, so when it becomes full, subsequently generated tokens are discarded
13 Token Bucket Network Packets from host Token Generator (Generates a token once every T seconds)
14 Token Bucket vs. Leaky Bucket Case 1: Short burst arrivals 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Arrival time at bucket Departure time from a leaky bucket Leaky bucket rate = 1 packet / 2 time units Leaky bucket size = 4 packets 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Departure time from a token bucket Token bucket rate = 1 tokens / 2 time units Token bucket size = 2 tokens
15 Token Bucket vs. Leaky Bucket Case 2: Large burst arrivals 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Arrival time at bucket Departure time from a leaky bucket Leaky bucket rate = 1 packet / 2 time units Leaky bucket size = 2 packets 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Departure time from a token bucket Token bucket rate = 1 token / 2 time units Token bucket size = 2 tokens
16 Flow Specification: Token Bucket • Characterized by two parameters (r, b) – r – average rate – b – token depth • Assume flow arrival rate <= R bps (e.g., R link capacity) • A bit is transmitted only when there is an available token • Arrival curve – maximum amount of bits transmitted by time t r bps b bits <= R bps regulator time bits b slope R slope r Arrival curve
17 Quality of service issues • Flow specification – Flow spec: traffic characteristics, QoS requirements (delay, jitter,bandwidth) • Routing – Routing traffic to best meet demand • Resource reservation – End-host signaling to network QoS resource requirements • Admission control – Limiting number of reservations • Packet scheduling – Packet by packet scheduling (fairness, delay) • RSVP addresses reservation
18 Integrated Services Example: Data Path Sender Receiver • Per-flow classification
19 Integrated Services Example: Data Path Sender Receiver • Per-flow buffer management
20 Integrated Services Example Sender Receiver • Per-flow scheduling
21 How Things Fit Together Admission Control Data In Data Out Control Plane Data Plane Scheduler Routing Routing Messages RSVP messages Classifier RSVP Route Lookup Forwarding Table Per Flow QoS Table
22 Service Classes • Multiple service classes • Service: contract between network and communication client – End-to-end service – Other service scopes possible • Three common services – Best-effort (“elastic” applications) – Hard real-time (“real-time” applications) – Soft real-time (“tolerant” applications)
23 Worse-case : Guaranteed Services • Service contract – Network to client: guarantee a deterministic upper bound on delay for each packet in a session – Client to network: the session does not send more than it specifies • Algorithm support – Admission control based on worst-case analysis – Per flow classification/scheduling at routers
24 Average-case: Controlled Load Service • Service contract: – Network to client: Average delay, jitter, bandwidth, e.g., makes network appear as an unloaded, best effort network with bandwidth and delay – Client to network: the session does not send more than it specifies • Algorithm Support – Admission control based on measurement of aggregates – Scheduling for aggregate possible
25 Role of RSVP in the Architecture • Signaling protocol for establishing per flow state • Carry resource requests from hosts to routers • Collect needed information from routers to hosts • At each hop – Consult admission control and policy module – Set up admission state or informs the requester of failure
26 RSVP Design Features • IP Multicast centric design • Receiver initiated reservation • Different reservation styles • Soft state inside network • Decouple routing from reservation
27 RSVP Reservation Model • Performs signaling to set up reservation state for a session • A session is a simplex data flow sent to a unicast or a multicast address, characterized by – <IP dest, protocol number, port number> • Multiple senders and receivers can be in session
28 The Big Picture Network Sender Receiver PATH Msg
29 The Big Picture (2) Network Sender Receiver PATH Msg RESV Msg
30 RSVP terminology • Flow descriptor (Flow spec + Filter Spec) • Flow spec (Rate, max burst) – Sender can Explicitly specify flow spec or not specify • Filter Spec (Sender address, TCP/UDP, Port#) – Aids in combining similar flows – Filter can be shared (SE-style) or can use wild cards (all senders on a given port or a given sender on all ports, etc) – The style may be shared or distinct in a sense that all reservations may be handled as one single reservation or there may be a single reservation for each upstream sender respectively.
31 RSVP Basic Operations • Sender: sends PATH message via the data delivery path – Set up the path state each router including the address of previous hop • Receiver sends RESV message on the reverse path – Specifies the reservation style, QoS desired – Set up the reservation state at each router • Things to notice – Receiver initiated reservation – Decouple routing from reservation – Two types of state: path and reservation
32 RSVP messages • PATH message – sets up state along path followed by packets • RESV message – request for reservation back along setup path path • PATH_TEAR, RESV_TEAR, RESV_CONFIRM, RESV_ERROR, PATH_ERROR
33 RSVP Operation Sender Receiver1 Receiver2 Receiver3 Merged reservations Merged reservations
34 RSVP PATH MESSAGE • From sender to receiver (unicast or multicast) • Intercepted at each RSVP aware hop • Includes – Sender TSpec : Traffic characteristics of the sender • Token bucket rate, depth, max flow rate, max packet size • forms one side of the ``contract'' between the data flow and the service. – F-flag: specify whether filtered reservation is allowed • Routers store: – Path state, i.e., PHOP address to previous hop (RSVP aware node) – If F-flag is set, store sender and its flowspec – Otherwise, just add new link to multicast tree
35 RSVP RESV MESSAGE • From receiver to sender(s) to reserve resources • Sent hop-by-hop using PHOP information • Reservation style and flow description – Reservation style (FF,SE, WF) – Fixed-filter, Shared-explicit, wildcard-filter – Senders to which the reservation applies – Rspec, QoS specific requirements – RSpec is highly specific to the service required, and may include information like bandwidth allocation, maximum delay, or packet loss probabilities etc. • RESV messages processing at each hop – Merging of RESV messages – Forwards resv messages using PHOP
36 Route Pinning • Problem: asymmetric routes – You may reserve resources on RS3S5S4S1S, but data travels on SS1S2S3R ! • Solution: use PATH to remember direct path from S to R, i.e., perform route pinning S1 S2 S3 S R S5 S4 PATH RESV IP routing
37 How Is the Token Bucket Used? • Can be enforced by – End-hosts (e.g., cable modems) – Routers (e.g., ingress routers in a Diffserv domain) • Can be used to characterize the traffic sent by an end-host
38 Source Traffic Characterization • Arrival curve – maximum amount of bits transmitted during an interval of time Δt • Use token bucket to bound the arrival curve Δt bits Arrival curve time bps
39 QoS Guarantees: Per-hop Reservation • End-host: specify – the arrival rate characterized by token-bucket with parameters (b,r,R) – the maximum maximum admissible delay D • Router: allocate bandwidth ra and buffer space Ba such that – no packet is dropped – no packet experiences a delay larger than D bits b*R/(R-r) slope r Arrival curve D Ba slope ra
40 End-to-End Reservation • When R gets PATH message it knows – Traffic characteristics (tspec): (r,b,R) – Number of hops • R sends back this information + worst-case delay in RESV • Each router along path provide a per-hop delay guarantee and forward RESV with updated info – In simplest case routers split the delay S1 S2 S3 S R (b,r,R) (b,r,R,3) num hops (b,r,R,2,D-d1) (b,r,R,1,D-d1-d2) (b,r,R,0,0) (b,r,R,3,D) worst-case delay PATH RESV
41 Reservation Style • Motivation: achieve more efficient resource utilization in multicast (M x N) • Observation: in a video conferencing when there are M senders, only a few can be active simultaneously – Multiple senders can share the same reservation • Various reservation styles specify different rules for sharing among senders
42 Reservation Styles and Filter Spec • Reservation style – use filter to specify which sender can use the reservation • Three styles – Wildcard filter: does not specify any sender; all packets associated to a destination shares same resources • Group in which there are a small number of simultaneously active senders – Fixed filter: no sharing among senders, sender explicitly identified for the reservation • Sources cannot be modified over time – Dynamic filter: resource shared by senders that are (explicitly) specified • Sources can be modified over time
43 Wildcard Filter Example • Receivers: H1, H2; senders: H3, H4, H5 • Each sender sends B • H1 reserves B; listen from one server at a time S1 S2 S3 H2 H1 H5 H4 H3 (B,*) (B,*) (B,*) (B,*) (B,*) (B,*) sender receiver
44 Wildcard Filter Example • H2 reserves B S1 S2 S3 H2 H1 H5 H4 H3 (B,*) (B,*) (B,*) sender receiver (B,*) (B,*) (B,*) (B,*)
45 Wildcard Filter • Advantages – Minimal state at routers • Routers need to maintain only routing state augmented by reserved bandwidth on outgoing links • Disadvantages – May result in inefficient resource utilization
46 Wildcard Filter: Inefficient Resource Utilization Example • H1 reserves 3B; wants to listen from all senders simultaneously • Problem: reserve 3B on (S3:S2) although 2B sufficient! S1 S2 S3 H2 H1 H5 H4 H3 (3B,*) (3B,*) (3B,*) sender receiver
47 Fixed Filter Example • Receivers: H2, H3, H4, H5; Senders: H1, H4, H5 • Routers maintain state for each receiver in the routing table S1 S2 S3 H2 H1 H3 sender receiver H5 H4 sender+receiver NextHop Sources H1 S2(H5, H4) H2 H1(H1), S2(H5, H4)
48 Fixed Filter Example • H2 wants to receive B only from H4 S1 S2 S3 H2 H1 H3 sender receiver H5 H4 sender+receiver (B,H4) (B,H4) (B,H4) (B,H4)
49 Dynamic Filter Example • H5 wants to receive 2B from any source S1 S2 S3 H2 H1 H3 sender receiver H5 H4 sender+receiver (B,H4) (B,H4) (B,H4) (2B,*) (B,H4) (B,*) (B,*)
50 Soft State • Per session state has a timer associated with it – path state, reservation state • State lost when timer expires • Sender/Receiver periodically refreshes the state • Claimed advantages – no need to clean up dangling state after failure – can tolerate lost signaling packets • signaling message need not be reliably transmitted – easy to adapt to route changes • State can be explicitly deleted by a Teardown message
51 Tear-down Example • H4 leaves the group – H4 no longer sends PATH message – State corresponding to H4 removed S1 S2 S3 H2 H1 H3 sender receiver H5 H4 sender+receiver (B,H4) (B,H4) (B,H4) (2B,*) (B,H4) (B,*) (B,*)
52 Tear-down Example • H4 leaves the group – H4 no longer sends PATH message – State corresponding to H4 removed S1 S2 S3 H2 H1 H3 sender receiver H5 sender+receiver (2B,*) (B,*) (B,*)
53 RSVP Soft-state • RSVP control messages need to be sent periodically – State will disappear if not refreshed – Periodic state refresh every t sec (30 sec) – If no refresh within n*t (n=3) , delete state • RSVP messages sent as router-alert message – Intermediate routers intercept packets and update state accordingly
54 Soft State (cont) • Per session state has a timer associated with it – Path state, reservation state • State lost when timer expires • Sender/Receiver periodically refreshes the state, resends PATH/RESV messages, resets timer • Claimed advantages – No need to clean up dangling state after failure – Can tolerate lost signaling packets • Signaling message need not be reliably transmitted – Easy to adapt to route changes • State can be explicitly deleted by a Teardown message
55 RSVP and Routing • RSVP designed to work with variety of routing protocols • Minimal routing service – RSVP asks routing how to route a PATH message • Route pinning – addresses QoS changes due to “avoidable” route changes while session in progress • QoS routing – RSVP route selection based on QoS parameters – granularity of reservation and routing may differ • Explicit routing – Use RSVP to set up routes for reserved traffic
56 Recap of RSVP • PATH message – sender template and traffic spec – advertisement – mark route for RESV message – follow data path • RESV message – reservation request, including flow and filter spec – reservation style and merging rules – follow reverse data path • Other messages – PathTear, ResvTear, PathErr, ResvErr
57 Why did IntServ fail? • Economic factors – Deployment cost vs Benefit • Is reservation, the right approach? – Multicast centric view • Is per-flow state maintenance an issue? • More about QoS in general …
58 What is the Problem? • Goal: provide support for wide variety of applications: – Interactive TV, IP telephony, on-line gamming (distributed simulations), VPNs, etc • Problem: – Best-effort cannot do it? – Intserv can support all these applications, but • Too complex • Not scalable
59 Differentiated Services (Diffserv) • Build around the concept of domain • Domain – a contiguous region of network under the same administrative ownership • Differentiate between edge and core routers • Edge routers – Perform per aggregate shaping or policing – Mark packets with a small number of bits; each bit encoding represents a class (subclass) • Core routers – Process packets based on packet marking • Far more scalable than Intserv, but provides weaker services
60 Diffserv Architecture • Ingress routers – Police/shape traffic – Set Differentiated Service Code Point (DSCP) in Diffserv (DS) field • Core routers – Implement Per Hop Behavior (PHB) for each DSCP – Process packets based on DSCP Ingress Egress Ingress Egress DS-1 DS-2 Edge router Core router
61 Differentiated Service (DS) Field Version HLen TOS Length Identification Fragment offset Flags Source address Destination address TTL Protocol Header checksum 0 4 8 16 19 31 Data IP header • DS filed reuse the first 6 bits from the former Type of Service (TOS) byte • The other two bits are proposed to be used by ECN DS Filed 0 5 6 7
62 Differentiated Services • Two types of service – Assured service – Premium service • Plus, best-effort service
63 Assured Service [Clark & Wroclawski ‘97] • Defined in terms of user profile, how much assured traffic is a user allowed to inject into the network • Network: provides a lower loss rate than best-effort – In case of congestion best-effort packets are dropped first • User: sends no more assured traffic than its profile – If it sends more, the excess traffic is converted to best- effort
64 Assured Service • Large spatial granularity service • Theoretically, user profile is defined irrespective of destination – All other services we learnt are end-to-end, i.e., we know destination(s) apriori • This makes service very useful, but hard to provision (why ?) Ingress Traffic profile
65 Premium Service [Jacobson ’97] • Provides the abstraction of a virtual pipe between an ingress and an egress router • Network: guarantees that premium packets (QoS) are not dropped and they experience low delay • User: does not send more than the size of the pipe – If it sends more, excess traffic is delayed, and dropped when buffer overflows
66 Edge Router Classifier Traffic conditioner Traffic conditioner Scheduler Class 1 Class 2 Best-effort Marked traffic Ingress Per aggregate Classification (e.g., user) Data traffic
67 Assumptions • Assume two bits – P-bit denotes premium traffic – A-bit denotes assured traffic • Traffic conditioner (TC) implement – Metering – Marking – Shaping
68 TC Performing Metering/Marking • Used to implement Assured Service • In-profile traffic is marked: – A-bit is set in every packet • Out-of-profile (excess) traffic is unmarked – A-bit is cleared (if it was previously set) in every packet; this traffic treated as best-effort r bps b bits Metering in-profile traffic out-of-profile traffic assured traffic User profile (token bucket) Set A-bit Clear A-bit
69 TC Performing Metering/Marking/Shaping • Used to implement Premium Service • In-profile traffic marked: – Set P-bit in each packet • Out-of-profile traffic is delayed, and when buffer overflows it is dropped r bps b bits Metering/ Shaper/ Set P-bit in-profile traffic out-of-profile traffic (delayed and dropped) premium traffic User profile (token bucket)
70 Scheduler • Employed by both edge and core routers • For premium service – use strict priority, or weighted fair queuing (WFQ) • For assured service – use RIO (RED with In and Out) – Always drop OUT packets first • For OUT measure entire queue • For IN measure only in-profile queue OUT IN Average queue length 1 Dropping probability
71 Scheduler Example • Premium traffic sent at high priority • Assured and best-effort traffic pass through RIO and then sent at low priority P-bit set? A-bit set? RIO yes no yes no high priority low priority
72 Control Path • Each domain is assigned a Bandwidth Broker (BB) – Usually, used to perform ingress-egress bandwidth allocation • BB is responsible to perform admission control in the entire domain • BB not easy to implement – Require complete knowledge about domain – Single point of failure, may be performance bottleneck – Designing BB still a research problem
73 Example • Achieve end-to-end bandwidth guarantee BB BB BB 1 2 3 5 7 9 sender receiver 8 profile 6 profile 4 profile
74 Comparison: Best-Effort, Diffserv, Intserv Best-Effort Diffserv Intserv Service Connectivity No isolation No guarantees Per aggregate isolation Per aggregate guarantee Per flow isolation Per flow guarantee Service scope End-to-end Domain End-to-end Complexity No setup Long term setup Per flow setup Scalability Highly scalable (nodes maintain only routing state) Scalable (edge routers maintains per aggregate state; core routers per class state) Not scalable (each router maintains per flow state)
75 Summary • Diffserv more scalable than Intserv – Edge routers maintain per aggregate state – Core routers maintain state only for a few traffic classes • But, provides weaker services than Intserv, e.g., – Per aggregate bandwidth guarantees (premium service) vs. per flow bandwidth and delay guarantees • BB is not an entirely solved problem – Single point of failure – Handle only long term reservations (hours, days)
76 Non-technical Factors Impacting QoS • Existing Networks – What is available today to solve our needs? Why switch? • Business Models – How QoS make doing business harders • Deployment Issues – How QoS makes running the network harder.
77 Existing Networks • Motivating applications? – Tele/Video conferencing, video distribution, VPN, games. • IP+QoS must be better AND cheaper than: – PSTN with N-way calling – Cable TV with digital recorders (Tivo) – Telecom leased lines (ISDN, ATM, SONET) – Peer to Peer networks
78 Business Issues • Service provider offers Qos(premium service) • Must be something customer can: – Understand • Counterexample: Complex statistical reasoning – Verify • 3rd party? • How do you know it works? Simulate a DoS attack? – Reclaim loss if service is not delivered • If you buy a lock and it doesn’t work, do you try to get your $ back? What if no one tried to break in?
79 Deployment Issues • Today’s IP operators use simple models to reason about what is a “good network” • Things you worry about: • IP packets • BGP routing • Simple Service Level Agreements (SLA)
80 Deployment Issues • QoS introduces extra effort for operators: – shaping, policing, reservation signaling, per-reservation billing and settlement. • QoS deployment changes: – Interface between an ISP and its neighbors – adds whole new complexities for customer and support personnel, – creates the need for accurate service auditing, • Increases the risk of litigation • Tradeoff: – Use QoS vs. make sure utilization is low most of the time? Which is easier?
81 Non-technical Issues summary • Working on QoS for IP for 20 years? – Why little/no progress? • QoS benefits must significant to overcome all non-technical obstacles. – Value to users must exceed all costs – A typical technology adoption problem? -> Technically better isn’t always good enough – QWERTY 10x backward compatibility rule? – QoS not cheaper, so 1000x?
82 Over Provisioning Vs. QoS • QoS: – Insure resources per flow • Over Provisioning – Domain of traffic engineering – Insure sufficient resources aggregate demand – Formalism for this approach?
83 Over Provisioning Formalism • Start with Traffic matrix – Cell is the traffic from source I to dest. J • Insure network delivers adequate performance for all “expected” matrixes

More Related Content

PPT
Quality of service
Ismail Mukiibi
 
PPT
QoSintro.PPT
payal445263
 
PPT
Traffic Characterization
Ismail Mukiibi
 
PPT
Congestion control and quality of service
JUW Jinnah University for Women
 
PPT
Computer Networks Quqlity of Service ppt
ssuserd24233
 
PDF
SGSGS
ApdiazizHussein
 
PDF
NZNOG 2020: Buffers, Buffer Bloat and BBR
APNIC
 
PPTX
Quality of Service
Abhishek Wadhwa
 
Quality of service
Ismail Mukiibi
 
QoSintro.PPT
payal445263
 
Traffic Characterization
Ismail Mukiibi
 
Congestion control and quality of service
JUW Jinnah University for Women
 
Computer Networks Quqlity of Service ppt
ssuserd24233
 
SGSGS
ApdiazizHussein
 
NZNOG 2020: Buffers, Buffer Bloat and BBR
APNIC
 
Quality of Service
Abhishek Wadhwa
 

Similar to qos-f05.ppt (20)

PPT
Qo s rsvp......
Abhishek Kesharwani
 
PDF
Lecture set 1
Gopi Saiteja
 
PPT
congestion_control: types, uses and application
khushboos0911
 
PPTX
UDEC_Redes_Comp_diapo_U1_p2_rev1_2024.pptx
hugarces1
 
PPTX
Network protocols and vulnerabilities
Prachi Gulihar
 
PPT
connecting devices part-2: Router and its uses
khushboos0911
 
PDF
Advanced networking - scheduling and QoS part 1
GIST (Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology)
 
PDF
RIPE 80: Buffers and Protocols
APNIC
 
PPTX
Tcp
Varsha Kumar
 
PPTX
ACN UNIT-2 INTSERV model for Internet.pptx
441GHarshavardhan
 
PPTX
Transport layer
arvind pandey
 
PPT
Qo s 09-integrated and red
Abhishek Kesharwani
 
PPT
integrated and diffrentiated services
Rishabh Gupta
 
PPTX
Quality of service(qos) by M.BILAL.SATTI
Muhammad Bilal Satti
 
PPTX
Congestion control
Aman Jaiswal
 
PPTX
Computer network transport layer MODUL 2.pptx
pallavir61
 
PDF
Computer Networks Module 2.pdf
ShanthalaKV
 
PPT
Learn TransportLayer of the OSI model to day with me.
SilasHAKUZWIMANA
 
PDF
Congestion control 1
Aman Jaiswal
 
PDF
CN Module 5 part 2 2022.pdf
MayankRaj687571
 
Qo s rsvp......
Abhishek Kesharwani
 
Lecture set 1
Gopi Saiteja
 
congestion_control: types, uses and application
khushboos0911
 
UDEC_Redes_Comp_diapo_U1_p2_rev1_2024.pptx
hugarces1
 
Network protocols and vulnerabilities
Prachi Gulihar
 
connecting devices part-2: Router and its uses
khushboos0911
 
Advanced networking - scheduling and QoS part 1
GIST (Gwangju Institute of Science and Technology)
 
RIPE 80: Buffers and Protocols
APNIC
 
Tcp
Varsha Kumar
 
ACN UNIT-2 INTSERV model for Internet.pptx
441GHarshavardhan
 
Transport layer
arvind pandey
 
Qo s 09-integrated and red
Abhishek Kesharwani
 
integrated and diffrentiated services
Rishabh Gupta
 
Quality of service(qos) by M.BILAL.SATTI
Muhammad Bilal Satti
 
Congestion control
Aman Jaiswal
 
Computer network transport layer MODUL 2.pptx
pallavir61
 
Computer Networks Module 2.pdf
ShanthalaKV
 
Learn TransportLayer of the OSI model to day with me.
SilasHAKUZWIMANA
 
Congestion control 1
Aman Jaiswal
 
CN Module 5 part 2 2022.pdf
MayankRaj687571
 
Ad

Recently uploaded (20)

PPT
tcp ip networks nd ip layering assotred slides
pakadamfdp
 
PDF
WebRTC in SignalWire - troubleshooting media negotiation
Giacomo Vacca
 
PPTX
Job_Card_System_Styled_lorem_ipsum_.pptx
Jeffkigen
 
PPT
isotopes_sddsadsaadasdasdasdasdsa1213.ppt
Kenneth James Alamillo
 
PPTX
innovation process that make everything different.pptx
SoumyadipPaul18
 
PPTX
PptxGenJS_Demo_Chart_20250317130215833.pptx
itruongva
 
PPTX
E -tech empowerment technologies PowerPoint
kylebalatero12
 
PDF
The Internet -By the Numbers, Sri Lanka Edition
APNIC
 
PPTX
international classification of diseases ICD-10 review PPT.pptx
naveenithkrishnan
 
PDF
Testing WebRTC applications at scale.pdf
Giacomo Vacca
 
PDF
Sims 4 Historia para lo sims 4 para jugar
lolpopy34
 
PPTX
Introduction to Information and Communication Technology
AkmadArzieAyao1
 
PPTX
Introduction about ICD -10 and ICD11 on 5.8.25.pptx
naveenithkrishnan
 
PDF
An introduction to the IFRS (ISSB) Stndards.pdf
farhankhan13694
 
PDF
Decoding a Decade: 10 Years of Applied CTI Discipline
Andreas Sfakianakis
 
PDF
RPKI Status Update, presented by Makito Lay at IDNOG 10
APNIC
 
PDF
Paper PDF World Game (s) Great Redesign.pdf
Steven McGee
 
PPTX
Slides PPTX World Game (s) Eco Economic Epochs.pptx
Steven McGee
 
PPTX
artificial intelligence overview of it and more
yafotin445
 
PDF
Tenda Login Guide: Access Your Router in 5 Easy Steps
tendawifi16
 
tcp ip networks nd ip layering assotred slides
pakadamfdp
 
WebRTC in SignalWire - troubleshooting media negotiation
Giacomo Vacca
 
Job_Card_System_Styled_lorem_ipsum_.pptx
Jeffkigen
 
isotopes_sddsadsaadasdasdasdasdsa1213.ppt
Kenneth James Alamillo
 
innovation process that make everything different.pptx
SoumyadipPaul18
 
PptxGenJS_Demo_Chart_20250317130215833.pptx
itruongva
 
E -tech empowerment technologies PowerPoint
kylebalatero12
 
The Internet -By the Numbers, Sri Lanka Edition
APNIC
 
international classification of diseases ICD-10 review PPT.pptx
naveenithkrishnan
 
Testing WebRTC applications at scale.pdf
Giacomo Vacca
 
Sims 4 Historia para lo sims 4 para jugar
lolpopy34
 
Introduction to Information and Communication Technology
AkmadArzieAyao1
 
Introduction about ICD -10 and ICD11 on 5.8.25.pptx
naveenithkrishnan
 
An introduction to the IFRS (ISSB) Stndards.pdf
farhankhan13694
 
Decoding a Decade: 10 Years of Applied CTI Discipline
Andreas Sfakianakis
 
RPKI Status Update, presented by Makito Lay at IDNOG 10
APNIC
 
Paper PDF World Game (s) Great Redesign.pdf
Steven McGee
 
Slides PPTX World Game (s) Eco Economic Epochs.pptx
Steven McGee
 
artificial intelligence overview of it and more
yafotin445
 
Tenda Login Guide: Access Your Router in 5 Easy Steps
tendawifi16
 
Ad

qos-f05.ppt

  • 1. 1 CS 552 Computer Networks Quality Of Service Richard Martin Credit slides by B. Nath, I. Stoica
  • 2. 2 Outline • What is Quality of Service • Basic mechanisms – Leaky and token buckets • Integrated Services (IntServ) • Differentiated Services (DiffServ) • Economics and Social factors facing QoS • QoS Vs. Over Provisioning
  • 3. 3 Best Effort vs. QoS • Best Effort: • You get a link to the Internet with at most B bits/sec. • If you don’t like it, switch to another provider. • Quality of Service (QoS) – We provide you some kind of guarantees for: • Bandwidth • Latency • Jitter – I.e., network is engineered to provide some Quality beyond “Not to exceed B bits/s”
  • 4. 4 QoS’s Quest The Holy Grail of computer networking is to design a network that has the flexibility and low cost of the Internet, yet offers the end-to- end quality-of-service guarantees of the telephone network. --S. Keshav
  • 5. 5 Two Styles of QoS • Worse-case – Provide bandwidth/delay/jitter guarantee to every packet – E.g., “hard real time” • Average-case – Provide bandwidth/delay/jitter guarantee over many packets – Statistical in nature – E.g. “Soft real time”
  • 6. 6 Resource Reservation: Example Router Router Src Dest 4 Mbps available 6 Mbps available 10 Mbps available Case 1: Source attempts to connect to destination, and attempts to reserve 4 Mbps for the connection Result: Connection accepted. There is enough bandwidth available. Available link bandwidths updated. Case 2: Source attempts to connect to destination, and attempts to reserve 5 Mbps for the connection Result: Failure. There is not enough bandwidth available on one of the links.
  • 7. 7 Resource Reservation (cont’d) • Once a connection is accepted, the host must use only the amount of resources reserved. It may not use more than that. • What if the host is malicious and attempts to use more network resources than it reserved?
  • 8. 8 Leaky Bucket • Used in conjunction with resource reservation to police the host’s reservation • At the host-network interface, allow packets into the network at a constant rate • Packets may be generated in a bursty manner, but after they pass through the leaky bucket, they enter the network evenly spaced
  • 10. 10 Leaky Bucket (cont’d) • The leaky bucket is a “traffic shaper”: It changes the characteristics of packet stream • Traffic shaping makes more manageable and more predictable • Usually the network tells the leaky bucket the rate at which it may send packets when the connection begins • Polices the average rate
  • 11. 11 Leaky Bucket: Doesn’t allow bursty transmissions • In some cases, we may want to allow short bursts of packets to enter the network without smoothing them out • For this purpose we use a token bucket, which is a modified leaky bucket
  • 12. 12 Token Bucket • The bucket holds tokens instead of packets • Tokens are generated and placed into the token bucket at a constant rate • When a packet arrives at the token bucket, it is transmitted if there is a token available. Otherwise it is buffered until a token becomes available. • The token bucket has a fixed size, so when it becomes full, subsequently generated tokens are discarded
  • 13. 13 Token Bucket Network Packets from host Token Generator (Generates a token once every T seconds)
  • 14. 14 Token Bucket vs. Leaky Bucket Case 1: Short burst arrivals 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Arrival time at bucket Departure time from a leaky bucket Leaky bucket rate = 1 packet / 2 time units Leaky bucket size = 4 packets 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Departure time from a token bucket Token bucket rate = 1 tokens / 2 time units Token bucket size = 2 tokens
  • 15. 15 Token Bucket vs. Leaky Bucket Case 2: Large burst arrivals 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Arrival time at bucket Departure time from a leaky bucket Leaky bucket rate = 1 packet / 2 time units Leaky bucket size = 2 packets 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Departure time from a token bucket Token bucket rate = 1 token / 2 time units Token bucket size = 2 tokens
  • 16. 16 Flow Specification: Token Bucket • Characterized by two parameters (r, b) – r – average rate – b – token depth • Assume flow arrival rate <= R bps (e.g., R link capacity) • A bit is transmitted only when there is an available token • Arrival curve – maximum amount of bits transmitted by time t r bps b bits <= R bps regulator time bits b slope R slope r Arrival curve
  • 17. 17 Quality of service issues • Flow specification – Flow spec: traffic characteristics, QoS requirements (delay, jitter,bandwidth) • Routing – Routing traffic to best meet demand • Resource reservation – End-host signaling to network QoS resource requirements • Admission control – Limiting number of reservations • Packet scheduling – Packet by packet scheduling (fairness, delay) • RSVP addresses reservation
  • 18. 18 Integrated Services Example: Data Path Sender Receiver • Per-flow classification
  • 19. 19 Integrated Services Example: Data Path Sender Receiver • Per-flow buffer management
  • 21. 21 How Things Fit Together Admission Control Data In Data Out Control Plane Data Plane Scheduler Routing Routing Messages RSVP messages Classifier RSVP Route Lookup Forwarding Table Per Flow QoS Table
  • 22. 22 Service Classes • Multiple service classes • Service: contract between network and communication client – End-to-end service – Other service scopes possible • Three common services – Best-effort (“elastic” applications) – Hard real-time (“real-time” applications) – Soft real-time (“tolerant” applications)
  • 23. 23 Worse-case : Guaranteed Services • Service contract – Network to client: guarantee a deterministic upper bound on delay for each packet in a session – Client to network: the session does not send more than it specifies • Algorithm support – Admission control based on worst-case analysis – Per flow classification/scheduling at routers
  • 24. 24 Average-case: Controlled Load Service • Service contract: – Network to client: Average delay, jitter, bandwidth, e.g., makes network appear as an unloaded, best effort network with bandwidth and delay – Client to network: the session does not send more than it specifies • Algorithm Support – Admission control based on measurement of aggregates – Scheduling for aggregate possible
  • 25. 25 Role of RSVP in the Architecture • Signaling protocol for establishing per flow state • Carry resource requests from hosts to routers • Collect needed information from routers to hosts • At each hop – Consult admission control and policy module – Set up admission state or informs the requester of failure
  • 26. 26 RSVP Design Features • IP Multicast centric design • Receiver initiated reservation • Different reservation styles • Soft state inside network • Decouple routing from reservation
  • 27. 27 RSVP Reservation Model • Performs signaling to set up reservation state for a session • A session is a simplex data flow sent to a unicast or a multicast address, characterized by – <IP dest, protocol number, port number> • Multiple senders and receivers can be in session
  • 29. 29 The Big Picture (2) Network Sender Receiver PATH Msg RESV Msg
  • 30. 30 RSVP terminology • Flow descriptor (Flow spec + Filter Spec) • Flow spec (Rate, max burst) – Sender can Explicitly specify flow spec or not specify • Filter Spec (Sender address, TCP/UDP, Port#) – Aids in combining similar flows – Filter can be shared (SE-style) or can use wild cards (all senders on a given port or a given sender on all ports, etc) – The style may be shared or distinct in a sense that all reservations may be handled as one single reservation or there may be a single reservation for each upstream sender respectively.
  • 31. 31 RSVP Basic Operations • Sender: sends PATH message via the data delivery path – Set up the path state each router including the address of previous hop • Receiver sends RESV message on the reverse path – Specifies the reservation style, QoS desired – Set up the reservation state at each router • Things to notice – Receiver initiated reservation – Decouple routing from reservation – Two types of state: path and reservation
  • 32. 32 RSVP messages • PATH message – sets up state along path followed by packets • RESV message – request for reservation back along setup path path • PATH_TEAR, RESV_TEAR, RESV_CONFIRM, RESV_ERROR, PATH_ERROR
  • 34. 34 RSVP PATH MESSAGE • From sender to receiver (unicast or multicast) • Intercepted at each RSVP aware hop • Includes – Sender TSpec : Traffic characteristics of the sender • Token bucket rate, depth, max flow rate, max packet size • forms one side of the ``contract'' between the data flow and the service. – F-flag: specify whether filtered reservation is allowed • Routers store: – Path state, i.e., PHOP address to previous hop (RSVP aware node) – If F-flag is set, store sender and its flowspec – Otherwise, just add new link to multicast tree
  • 35. 35 RSVP RESV MESSAGE • From receiver to sender(s) to reserve resources • Sent hop-by-hop using PHOP information • Reservation style and flow description – Reservation style (FF,SE, WF) – Fixed-filter, Shared-explicit, wildcard-filter – Senders to which the reservation applies – Rspec, QoS specific requirements – RSpec is highly specific to the service required, and may include information like bandwidth allocation, maximum delay, or packet loss probabilities etc. • RESV messages processing at each hop – Merging of RESV messages – Forwards resv messages using PHOP
  • 36. 36 Route Pinning • Problem: asymmetric routes – You may reserve resources on RS3S5S4S1S, but data travels on SS1S2S3R ! • Solution: use PATH to remember direct path from S to R, i.e., perform route pinning S1 S2 S3 S R S5 S4 PATH RESV IP routing
  • 37. 37 How Is the Token Bucket Used? • Can be enforced by – End-hosts (e.g., cable modems) – Routers (e.g., ingress routers in a Diffserv domain) • Can be used to characterize the traffic sent by an end-host
  • 38. 38 Source Traffic Characterization • Arrival curve – maximum amount of bits transmitted during an interval of time Δt • Use token bucket to bound the arrival curve Δt bits Arrival curve time bps
  • 39. 39 QoS Guarantees: Per-hop Reservation • End-host: specify – the arrival rate characterized by token-bucket with parameters (b,r,R) – the maximum maximum admissible delay D • Router: allocate bandwidth ra and buffer space Ba such that – no packet is dropped – no packet experiences a delay larger than D bits b*R/(R-r) slope r Arrival curve D Ba slope ra
  • 40. 40 End-to-End Reservation • When R gets PATH message it knows – Traffic characteristics (tspec): (r,b,R) – Number of hops • R sends back this information + worst-case delay in RESV • Each router along path provide a per-hop delay guarantee and forward RESV with updated info – In simplest case routers split the delay S1 S2 S3 S R (b,r,R) (b,r,R,3) num hops (b,r,R,2,D-d1) (b,r,R,1,D-d1-d2) (b,r,R,0,0) (b,r,R,3,D) worst-case delay PATH RESV
  • 41. 41 Reservation Style • Motivation: achieve more efficient resource utilization in multicast (M x N) • Observation: in a video conferencing when there are M senders, only a few can be active simultaneously – Multiple senders can share the same reservation • Various reservation styles specify different rules for sharing among senders
  • 42. 42 Reservation Styles and Filter Spec • Reservation style – use filter to specify which sender can use the reservation • Three styles – Wildcard filter: does not specify any sender; all packets associated to a destination shares same resources • Group in which there are a small number of simultaneously active senders – Fixed filter: no sharing among senders, sender explicitly identified for the reservation • Sources cannot be modified over time – Dynamic filter: resource shared by senders that are (explicitly) specified • Sources can be modified over time
  • 43. 43 Wildcard Filter Example • Receivers: H1, H2; senders: H3, H4, H5 • Each sender sends B • H1 reserves B; listen from one server at a time S1 S2 S3 H2 H1 H5 H4 H3 (B,*) (B,*) (B,*) (B,*) (B,*) (B,*) sender receiver
  • 44. 44 Wildcard Filter Example • H2 reserves B S1 S2 S3 H2 H1 H5 H4 H3 (B,*) (B,*) (B,*) sender receiver (B,*) (B,*) (B,*) (B,*)
  • 45. 45 Wildcard Filter • Advantages – Minimal state at routers • Routers need to maintain only routing state augmented by reserved bandwidth on outgoing links • Disadvantages – May result in inefficient resource utilization
  • 46. 46 Wildcard Filter: Inefficient Resource Utilization Example • H1 reserves 3B; wants to listen from all senders simultaneously • Problem: reserve 3B on (S3:S2) although 2B sufficient! S1 S2 S3 H2 H1 H5 H4 H3 (3B,*) (3B,*) (3B,*) sender receiver
  • 47. 47 Fixed Filter Example • Receivers: H2, H3, H4, H5; Senders: H1, H4, H5 • Routers maintain state for each receiver in the routing table S1 S2 S3 H2 H1 H3 sender receiver H5 H4 sender+receiver NextHop Sources H1 S2(H5, H4) H2 H1(H1), S2(H5, H4)
  • 48. 48 Fixed Filter Example • H2 wants to receive B only from H4 S1 S2 S3 H2 H1 H3 sender receiver H5 H4 sender+receiver (B,H4) (B,H4) (B,H4) (B,H4)
  • 49. 49 Dynamic Filter Example • H5 wants to receive 2B from any source S1 S2 S3 H2 H1 H3 sender receiver H5 H4 sender+receiver (B,H4) (B,H4) (B,H4) (2B,*) (B,H4) (B,*) (B,*)
  • 50. 50 Soft State • Per session state has a timer associated with it – path state, reservation state • State lost when timer expires • Sender/Receiver periodically refreshes the state • Claimed advantages – no need to clean up dangling state after failure – can tolerate lost signaling packets • signaling message need not be reliably transmitted – easy to adapt to route changes • State can be explicitly deleted by a Teardown message
  • 51. 51 Tear-down Example • H4 leaves the group – H4 no longer sends PATH message – State corresponding to H4 removed S1 S2 S3 H2 H1 H3 sender receiver H5 H4 sender+receiver (B,H4) (B,H4) (B,H4) (2B,*) (B,H4) (B,*) (B,*)
  • 52. 52 Tear-down Example • H4 leaves the group – H4 no longer sends PATH message – State corresponding to H4 removed S1 S2 S3 H2 H1 H3 sender receiver H5 sender+receiver (2B,*) (B,*) (B,*)
  • 53. 53 RSVP Soft-state • RSVP control messages need to be sent periodically – State will disappear if not refreshed – Periodic state refresh every t sec (30 sec) – If no refresh within n*t (n=3) , delete state • RSVP messages sent as router-alert message – Intermediate routers intercept packets and update state accordingly
  • 54. 54 Soft State (cont) • Per session state has a timer associated with it – Path state, reservation state • State lost when timer expires • Sender/Receiver periodically refreshes the state, resends PATH/RESV messages, resets timer • Claimed advantages – No need to clean up dangling state after failure – Can tolerate lost signaling packets • Signaling message need not be reliably transmitted – Easy to adapt to route changes • State can be explicitly deleted by a Teardown message
  • 55. 55 RSVP and Routing • RSVP designed to work with variety of routing protocols • Minimal routing service – RSVP asks routing how to route a PATH message • Route pinning – addresses QoS changes due to “avoidable” route changes while session in progress • QoS routing – RSVP route selection based on QoS parameters – granularity of reservation and routing may differ • Explicit routing – Use RSVP to set up routes for reserved traffic
  • 56. 56 Recap of RSVP • PATH message – sender template and traffic spec – advertisement – mark route for RESV message – follow data path • RESV message – reservation request, including flow and filter spec – reservation style and merging rules – follow reverse data path • Other messages – PathTear, ResvTear, PathErr, ResvErr
  • 57. 57 Why did IntServ fail? • Economic factors – Deployment cost vs Benefit • Is reservation, the right approach? – Multicast centric view • Is per-flow state maintenance an issue? • More about QoS in general …
  • 58. 58 What is the Problem? • Goal: provide support for wide variety of applications: – Interactive TV, IP telephony, on-line gamming (distributed simulations), VPNs, etc • Problem: – Best-effort cannot do it? – Intserv can support all these applications, but • Too complex • Not scalable
  • 59. 59 Differentiated Services (Diffserv) • Build around the concept of domain • Domain – a contiguous region of network under the same administrative ownership • Differentiate between edge and core routers • Edge routers – Perform per aggregate shaping or policing – Mark packets with a small number of bits; each bit encoding represents a class (subclass) • Core routers – Process packets based on packet marking • Far more scalable than Intserv, but provides weaker services
  • 60. 60 Diffserv Architecture • Ingress routers – Police/shape traffic – Set Differentiated Service Code Point (DSCP) in Diffserv (DS) field • Core routers – Implement Per Hop Behavior (PHB) for each DSCP – Process packets based on DSCP Ingress Egress Ingress Egress DS-1 DS-2 Edge router Core router
  • 61. 61 Differentiated Service (DS) Field Version HLen TOS Length Identification Fragment offset Flags Source address Destination address TTL Protocol Header checksum 0 4 8 16 19 31 Data IP header • DS filed reuse the first 6 bits from the former Type of Service (TOS) byte • The other two bits are proposed to be used by ECN DS Filed 0 5 6 7
  • 62. 62 Differentiated Services • Two types of service – Assured service – Premium service • Plus, best-effort service
  • 63. 63 Assured Service [Clark & Wroclawski ‘97] • Defined in terms of user profile, how much assured traffic is a user allowed to inject into the network • Network: provides a lower loss rate than best-effort – In case of congestion best-effort packets are dropped first • User: sends no more assured traffic than its profile – If it sends more, the excess traffic is converted to best- effort
  • 64. 64 Assured Service • Large spatial granularity service • Theoretically, user profile is defined irrespective of destination – All other services we learnt are end-to-end, i.e., we know destination(s) apriori • This makes service very useful, but hard to provision (why ?) Ingress Traffic profile
  • 65. 65 Premium Service [Jacobson ’97] • Provides the abstraction of a virtual pipe between an ingress and an egress router • Network: guarantees that premium packets (QoS) are not dropped and they experience low delay • User: does not send more than the size of the pipe – If it sends more, excess traffic is delayed, and dropped when buffer overflows
  • 66. 66 Edge Router Classifier Traffic conditioner Traffic conditioner Scheduler Class 1 Class 2 Best-effort Marked traffic Ingress Per aggregate Classification (e.g., user) Data traffic
  • 67. 67 Assumptions • Assume two bits – P-bit denotes premium traffic – A-bit denotes assured traffic • Traffic conditioner (TC) implement – Metering – Marking – Shaping
  • 68. 68 TC Performing Metering/Marking • Used to implement Assured Service • In-profile traffic is marked: – A-bit is set in every packet • Out-of-profile (excess) traffic is unmarked – A-bit is cleared (if it was previously set) in every packet; this traffic treated as best-effort r bps b bits Metering in-profile traffic out-of-profile traffic assured traffic User profile (token bucket) Set A-bit Clear A-bit
  • 69. 69 TC Performing Metering/Marking/Shaping • Used to implement Premium Service • In-profile traffic marked: – Set P-bit in each packet • Out-of-profile traffic is delayed, and when buffer overflows it is dropped r bps b bits Metering/ Shaper/ Set P-bit in-profile traffic out-of-profile traffic (delayed and dropped) premium traffic User profile (token bucket)
  • 70. 70 Scheduler • Employed by both edge and core routers • For premium service – use strict priority, or weighted fair queuing (WFQ) • For assured service – use RIO (RED with In and Out) – Always drop OUT packets first • For OUT measure entire queue • For IN measure only in-profile queue OUT IN Average queue length 1 Dropping probability
  • 71. 71 Scheduler Example • Premium traffic sent at high priority • Assured and best-effort traffic pass through RIO and then sent at low priority P-bit set? A-bit set? RIO yes no yes no high priority low priority
  • 72. 72 Control Path • Each domain is assigned a Bandwidth Broker (BB) – Usually, used to perform ingress-egress bandwidth allocation • BB is responsible to perform admission control in the entire domain • BB not easy to implement – Require complete knowledge about domain – Single point of failure, may be performance bottleneck – Designing BB still a research problem
  • 73. 73 Example • Achieve end-to-end bandwidth guarantee BB BB BB 1 2 3 5 7 9 sender receiver 8 profile 6 profile 4 profile
  • 74. 74 Comparison: Best-Effort, Diffserv, Intserv Best-Effort Diffserv Intserv Service Connectivity No isolation No guarantees Per aggregate isolation Per aggregate guarantee Per flow isolation Per flow guarantee Service scope End-to-end Domain End-to-end Complexity No setup Long term setup Per flow setup Scalability Highly scalable (nodes maintain only routing state) Scalable (edge routers maintains per aggregate state; core routers per class state) Not scalable (each router maintains per flow state)
  • 75. 75 Summary • Diffserv more scalable than Intserv – Edge routers maintain per aggregate state – Core routers maintain state only for a few traffic classes • But, provides weaker services than Intserv, e.g., – Per aggregate bandwidth guarantees (premium service) vs. per flow bandwidth and delay guarantees • BB is not an entirely solved problem – Single point of failure – Handle only long term reservations (hours, days)
  • 76. 76 Non-technical Factors Impacting QoS • Existing Networks – What is available today to solve our needs? Why switch? • Business Models – How QoS make doing business harders • Deployment Issues – How QoS makes running the network harder.
  • 77. 77 Existing Networks • Motivating applications? – Tele/Video conferencing, video distribution, VPN, games. • IP+QoS must be better AND cheaper than: – PSTN with N-way calling – Cable TV with digital recorders (Tivo) – Telecom leased lines (ISDN, ATM, SONET) – Peer to Peer networks
  • 78. 78 Business Issues • Service provider offers Qos(premium service) • Must be something customer can: – Understand • Counterexample: Complex statistical reasoning – Verify • 3rd party? • How do you know it works? Simulate a DoS attack? – Reclaim loss if service is not delivered • If you buy a lock and it doesn’t work, do you try to get your $ back? What if no one tried to break in?
  • 79. 79 Deployment Issues • Today’s IP operators use simple models to reason about what is a “good network” • Things you worry about: • IP packets • BGP routing • Simple Service Level Agreements (SLA)
  • 80. 80 Deployment Issues • QoS introduces extra effort for operators: – shaping, policing, reservation signaling, per-reservation billing and settlement. • QoS deployment changes: – Interface between an ISP and its neighbors – adds whole new complexities for customer and support personnel, – creates the need for accurate service auditing, • Increases the risk of litigation • Tradeoff: – Use QoS vs. make sure utilization is low most of the time? Which is easier?
  • 81. 81 Non-technical Issues summary • Working on QoS for IP for 20 years? – Why little/no progress? • QoS benefits must significant to overcome all non-technical obstacles. – Value to users must exceed all costs – A typical technology adoption problem? -> Technically better isn’t always good enough – QWERTY 10x backward compatibility rule? – QoS not cheaper, so 1000x?
  • 82. 82 Over Provisioning Vs. QoS • QoS: – Insure resources per flow • Over Provisioning – Domain of traffic engineering – Insure sufficient resources aggregate demand – Formalism for this approach?
  • 83. 83 Over Provisioning Formalism • Start with Traffic matrix – Cell is the traffic from source I to dest. J • Insure network delivers adequate performance for all “expected” matrixes