A comparison of simulated traffic conditioner performance

Strauss, Tinus; Kourie, Derrick G.; Olivier, Martin S.

doi:10.1016/j.comcom.2008.07.015

Cited by 2 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 10 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Traffic Conditioning Agreement (TCA) is derived from this Service Level Agreement. (Blake et al, 1998;Carlson et al, 1998;Oyetunji et al, 2012;Strauss, Kourie, & Olivier, 2005).…”

Section: Traffic Clasification and Conditioningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Comparative Analysis of Variants of Token Bucket Traffic Meter Algorithms for QoS Router using UDP as Traffic Agent

Oyetunji¹,

Emuoyinbofarhe

J.B

et al. 2018

IJSMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Traffic meter algorithms serve as a means of examining traffic stream’s conformance with service level agreement between customers (traffic sources) and Internet Service provider at the edge router of a differentiated service domain for proper quality of service admission control. This paper presented comparative analysis of variants of token bucket meter algorithms for QoS router using user datagram protocol (UDP) as traffic agents and exponential ON/OFF as traffic generator. The research adopted simulation technique to carry out the design of network models or topologies using the same parameter setting to implement the algorithm of token bucket variants of traffic meter. The following metrics were used for the evaluation: throughput, fairness rate, loss rate and one-way packet delay. The evaluated results were ranked and further subjected to 2-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) model to indicate the significant differences among the traffic meter algorithms. Based on ranking system, TRTCM was ranked first in terms of throughput (with 67117) and fairness rate (with 0.2586) and TBM was ranked first in terms of loss rate (with 74.003) and one-way packet delay (with 0.09304). The 2-way ANOVA model showed the significant differences among the traffic meter algorithms considered for the simulation.

show abstract

“…Traffic Conditioning Agreement (TCA) is derived from this Service Level Agreement. (Blake et al, 1998;Carlson et al, 1998;Oyetunji et al, 2012;Strauss, Kourie, & Olivier, 2005).…”

Section: Traffic Clasification and Conditioningmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the simplest model, each packet is either in-profile or out-of-profile based on the metering result at the arrival time of the packet. In-profile packets obtain better traffic conditioning and forwarding treatment than outof-profile packets (Blake et al, 1998;Strauss et al, 2005).…”

Section: Traffic Clasification and Conditioningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Analysis of Variants of Token Bucket Traffic Meter Algorithms for QoS Router using UDP as Traffic Agent

Oyetunji¹,

Emuoyinbofarhe

J.B

et al. 2018

IJSMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…It measures a traffic stream based on two parameters: committed information rate (CIR) and committed burst size (CBS). The meters is specified in terms of token bucket with size CBS and token rate CIR [7] [8]. Tokens are generated at committed information rate and are added to the token bucket.…”

Section: Token Bucketmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…If there are not enough tokens in the bucket the packet is out of profile. The conditioner marks a packet 'green' when it is in profile and 'red' when it is out of profile [8].…”

Section: Token Bucketmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Performance Evaluation of Traffic Meters: Token Bucket Marker and Two Rate Three Color Marker (trTCM) QoS Admission Control

Oyetunji¹,

Oladeji²,

Emuoyinbofarhe³

2012

IJCA

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The key role of traffic meter for quality of service admission control internet is to control the amount of traffic injected into the differentiated service network so that congestion can be avoided to the barest minimum in order to meet certain performance requirements. This paper presents performance evaluation and analysis of two traffic meters: token bucket marker (TBM) and two rate three color marker (srTCM) QoS admission control using user datagram protocol (UDP) and transport control protocol (TCP) traffic agents. The performance measures used for the evaluation and analysis were throughput, fairness and losses. An in-depth study of the aforementioned admission control mechanisms that can enforce service level agreement (SLA) was carried out in order to suggest to the IETF which of the proposed meter would best provide QoS to users. A network simulator, ns-2.35 to be precise, was used to run the simulation to showcase the analysis and evaluation of the traffic meters. For TCP traffic agent, the analysis based on fairness, throughput and losses showed that the two rate three color marker with percentages 13.15 for fairness, 98.85 for throughput and 0.14 for losses was better in all ramification than the token bucket marker traffic meter with percentages of 12.50 for fairness, 96.66 for throughput and 1.34 losses. For UDP traffic, reverse was the case. The token bucker marker traffic meter with 24.54% of fairness, 62.69% of throughput and 37.37% of losses was better than the two rate three color marker traffic meter with 13.99% of fairness, 21.10% of throughput and 78.99% of losses.

show abstract

A comparison of simulated traffic conditioner performance

Cited by 2 publications

References 10 publications

Comparative Analysis of Variants of Token Bucket Traffic Meter Algorithms for QoS Router using UDP as Traffic Agent

Comparative Analysis of Variants of Token Bucket Traffic Meter Algorithms for QoS Router using UDP as Traffic Agent

Performance Evaluation of Traffic Meters: Token Bucket Marker and Two Rate Three Color Marker (trTCM) QoS Admission Control

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About