On Bounds on Cumulative Teletraffic Using Min-Plus Convolution

Open access

Abstract

Ideas and results published in two papers by R. L. Cruz in IEEE Transactions on Information Theory in 1991 gave rise to what is called now network calculus. A key role in it plays a certain inequality characterizing the behaviour of cumulative traffic curves. It defines the so-called burstiness constraint by which many kinds of traffics can be described, as for example those occurring in computer networks. Interpretation of this constraint, which can be expressed in two equivalent forms: with and without the use of min-plus convolution, can be found in papers of R. L. Cruz. Nothing however was said about how to obtain it practically, for example, for each of representatives of a family of measured cumulative traffic curves being upperbounded. This problem is tackled in this paper, and as a result, a relation between the Cruz’s constraining function and an upper-bounding function of measured traffic curves is found. The relation obtained is quite general and valid also for the case of non-fulfilment of the so-called sub-additivity property by traffic curves. For the purpose of its derivation, a notion of sub-additivity property with some tolerance Δ was introduced, and the corresponding theorem exploiting it formulated and proved. Further, to complement discussion of the above relation, a minimal burstiness constraint was added to the original Cruz’s inequality and related with a lower bound of a family of measured cumulative traffic curves. The derivations presented in this paper are illustrated by examples.

[1] R. L. Cruz, “A calculus for network delay, Part I: Network elements in isolation,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 37, pp. 114-131, January 1991.

[2] J.-Y. Le Boudec and P. Thiran, Network Calculus. A Theory of DeterministicQueuing Systems for the Internet. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 2004.

[3] S. Mao and S. S. Panwar, “A survey of envelope processes and their applications in quality of service provisioning,” IEEE CommunicationsSurveys, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 2-19, 2006.

[4] R. Agrawal, R. L. Cruz, C. Okino, and R. Rajan, “Performance bounds for flow control protocols,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 7, pp. 310-323, June 1999.

[5] R. L. Cruz, “A calculus for network delay, Part II: Network analysis,” IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, vol. 37, pp. 132-141, January 1991.

[6] A. K. Parekh and R. G. Gallager, “A generalized processor sharing approach to flow control in integrated services networks: The single node case,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 1, pp. 344- 357, June 1993.

[7] --, “A generalized processor sharing approach to flow control in integrated services networks: The multiple node case,” IEEE/ACMTransactions on Networking, vol. 2, pp. 137-150, April 1994.

[8] V. Firoiu, J.-Y. Le Boudec, D. Towsley, and Z.-L. Zhang, “Theories and models for internet quality of service,” Proceedings of the IEEE, vol. 90, no. 9, pp. 1565-1591, 2002.

[9] M. Fidler, “A survey of deterministic and stochastic service curve models in the network calculus,” IEEE Communication Surveys & Tutorials, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 59-86, 2010.

[10] C.-S. Chang, Performance Guarantees in Communication Networks. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 2000.

[11] Y. Jiang and Y. Liu, Stochastic Network Calculus. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 2008.

[12] J.-Y. Le Boudec, “Some properties of variable length packet shapers,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 10, pp. 329-337, June 2002.

International Journal of Electronics and Telecommunications

The Journal of Committee of Electronics and Telecommunications of Polish Academy of Sciences

Journal Information


CiteScore 2016: 0.72

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2016: 0.248
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2016: 0.542

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 0 0 0
Full Text Views 77 77 3
PDF Downloads 30 30 3