At the extremes of the complexity‐performance plane, there are two exemplary QoS management architectures: Integrated Services (IntServ) and Differentiated Services (DiffServ). IntServ performs ideally but is not scalable. DiffServ is simple enough to be adopted in today's core networks, but without any performance guarantee. Many compromise solutions have been proposed. These schemes, called quasi‐stateful IntServ or stateful DiffServ, however, have not attracted much attention due to their inherently compromising natures. Two disruptive flow‐based architectures have been recently introduced: the flow‐aware network (FAN) and the flow‐state‐aware network (FSA). FAN's control is implicit without any signaling. FSA's control is even more sophisticated than that of IntServ. In this paper, we survey established QoS architectures, review disruptive architectures, discuss their rationales, and points out their disadvantages. A new QoS management architecture, flow‐aggregate‐based services (FAbS), is then proposed. The FAbS architecture has two novel building blocks: inter‐domain flow aggregation and endpoint implicit admission control.
Emerging applications such as industrial automation, in-vehicle, professional audio-video, and wide area electrical utility networks require strict bounds on the end-to-end network delay. Solutions so far to such a requirement are either impractical or ineffective. Flow based schedulers suggested in a traditional integrated services (IntServ) framework are O(N) or O(log N), where N is the number of flows in the scheduler, which can grow to tens of thousands in a core router. Due to such complexity, class-based schedulers are adopted in real deployments. The class-based systems, however, cannot provide bounded delays in networks with cycle, since the maximum burst grows infinitely along the cycled path. Attaching a regulator in front of a scheduler to limit the maximum burst is considered as a viable solution. International standards, such as IEEE 802.1 time sensitive network (TSN) and IETF deterministic network (DetNet) are adopting this approach as a standard. The regulator in TSN and DetNet, however, requires flow state information, therefore contradicts to the simple class-based schedulers. This paper suggests non-work conserving fair schedulers, called ‘regulating schedulers’ (RSC), which function as a regulator and a scheduler at the same time. A deficit round-robin (DRR) based RSC, called nw-DRR, is devised and proved to be both a fair scheduler and a regulator. Despite the lower complexity, the input port-based nw-DRR is shown to perform better than the current TSN approach, and to bind the end-to-end delay within a few milliseconds in realistic network scenarios.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.