An IP cross-layer scheduler for relative QoS support in NGNs

Panza, Gianmarco; Grilli, Sara

doi:10.1109/glocom.2013.6831282

Cited by 2 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…[10] in not heavy average traffic load conditions and higher number of supported IP classes for an enlarged service differentiation are not reported. As already mentioned in Sect.…”

Section: Simulation Resultsmentioning

confidence: 62%

“…This is also applied when comparing the cross-layer scheduler in closed-loop control with the former classical non-cross-layer version of the AWTP scheduler. Indeed, the discussions provided in this section point out the benefits of the novel scheduler with respect to both the wellconsolidated classical approach and the most performing solution available in literature [10] to support a PDM at the interface on the whole (where a cross-layer AWTP scheduler has been proposed in open-loop).…”

Section: Simulation Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…There is yet a solution that proposes to shift the PDM support from IP to MAC layer, able to offer delay differentiation and loss proportionality between priority queues, while maximizing the throughput over a multi-state wireless channel [10] [11]. However, it has limited applicability and does not consider the actual run-time IP layer performance in the PDM provisioning.…”

Section: Pdm Support and Open Issuesmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…However, the time-variant performance of the radio channel still entails unpredictable (and not negligible) delays with the result that the service proportionality between the classes as configured at the IP layer can be seriously compromised [10]. There is yet a solution that proposes to shift the PDM support from IP to MAC layer, able to offer delay differentiation and loss proportionality between priority queues, while maximizing the throughput over a multi-state wireless channel [10] [11].…”

Section: Pdm Support and Open Issuesmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…[10] defines a general framework in which IP, MAC and PHY layers are considered on the whole from the prospective of the packet scheduling. Indeed, the proposed IP scheduler leverages feedbacks about the delay experienced at the lower layers to tune at run-time the packet service priority by an AWTP-like algorithm in order to consistently support a PDM.…”

Section: Pdm Support and Open Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Cross-layer Scheduling with Feedback for QoS Support

Panza

Grilli

2014

Procedia Computer Science

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Next-Generation Networks (NGNs) will support Quality of Service (QoS) over a mixed wired and wireless IP-based infrastructure. A relative model of service differentiation in Differentiated Services architecture is a scalable solution for delivering multimedia traffic. However, considering the dynamic nature of radio channels typically, it is difficult to achieve a given service provisioning working at the IP and lower layers separately as in the classical approach, without a run-time adaptation of the system towards the target quality. This work describes an IP cross-layer scheduler able to support a Proportional Differentiation Model (PDM) for delay guarantees with content-awareness, also over wireless. The key idea is to leverage feedbacks from the lower layers about the actual delays experienced by packets in order to tune at run-time the priority of the IP service classes in a closed-loop control with the objective of supporting a PDM at the network node on the whole, considering the cumulative latency in crossing the first three layers of the protocol stack, as relevant for the end-user. A simulation analysis demonstrates the prominent improvements in reliability and robustness of the proposal in the case of time-variant performance of the MAC and PHY layers with respect to the classical non-cross-layer approach and the openloop control. Furthermore, considerations on the required functionality and likely deployment scenarios highlight the scalability and backward compatibility of the designed solution in supporting the concept of network transparency for the delivering of critical applications, as of the e-health domain.

show abstract

“…[10] in not heavy average traffic load conditions and higher number of supported IP classes for an enlarged service differentiation are not reported. As already mentioned in Sect.…”

Section: Simulation Resultsmentioning

confidence: 62%

Section: Simulation Resultsmentioning

confidence: 98%