RCFT: A Termination Method for Simple PCN-Based Flow Control

Lehrieder, Frank; Menth, Michael

doi:10.1007/s10922-013-9264-6

Cited by 1 publication

(3 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Decisions to take actions nodes has been suggested by other authors [5,6] . However, some essential components are missing in the signaling.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Hence, it is expected that results from existing research on the effectiveness of dPCN are also valid when cPCN is used. As in the aforementioned references [1][2][3][4][5][6] , our specifications and simulations are based on 'traditional' networks assuming an interior gateway protocol and destination based forwarding. However, the cPCN signaling architecture fits very well to the centralized nature of the control architecture of emerging Software Defined Networks (SDN, see e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For that, a reference is made to the common open policy service architecture (COPS, [21] ) and the diameter based protocol (DBP, [22] ) as a basis for a full signaling architecture. In [6] a signaling protocol, regular-check-based flow termination (RCFT), is proposed using RSVP as a carrier. It fills in the gap in the FT-communication between egress and ingress nodes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Flow termination signaling in the centralized pre-congestion notification architecture

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

a b s t r a c tPre-congestion notification (PCN) protects inelastic traffic by using feedback on network link loads on and acting upon this accordingly. These actions comprise to admission control and termination of flows. Two PCN architectures have been defined by IETF: the centralized and decentralized PCN architecture. The decentralized PCN architecture has received much attention in the literature whereas the centralized PCN architecture has not. In the decentralized architecture, feedback is sent from the egress nodes to ingress nodes, which then take and apply decisions regarding admission of new flows and/or termination of ongoing flows. Signaling occurs only between ingress and egress nodes.In the centralized architecture these decisions are made at a central node, which requires proper signaling for action and information exchange between the central node and the egress and ingress nodes. This signaling has been suggested by other authors, but is not fully defined yet. Our contribution is twofold. We define signaling in the centralized PCN architecture focussing on flow termination, which completes the definition of the signaling in the centralized PCN architecture. Secondly, we run extensive simulations showing that the proposed signaling works well and that the performances of the centralized PCN and the decentralized PCN architectures are similar. Hence, it is expected that results from existing research on the effectiveness of decentralized PCN are also valid when the centralized PCN architecture is used.

show abstract

“…Decisions to take actions nodes has been suggested by other authors [5,6] . However, some essential components are missing in the signaling.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%