2011 ACM/IEEE Seventh Symposium on Architectures for Networking and Communications Systems 2011
DOI: 10.1109/ancs.2011.43
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance Measurement of Name-Centric Content Distribution Methods

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
6
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
6
3

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 11 publications
(6 citation statements)
references
References 3 publications
0
6
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A comprehensive description of CCN can be found in [12]. Many simulation and experimental testbeds have been done in, e.g., [31]. Mangili et al [19] proposed a performance model for CCN to compare with CDN.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A comprehensive description of CCN can be found in [12]. Many simulation and experimental testbeds have been done in, e.g., [31]. Mangili et al [19] proposed a performance model for CCN to compare with CDN.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…We noticed that the performance of some CCNx applications, especially those written in Java, was severely limited by the CPU which has been attributed to packet encoding [11] and heavy state management [12]. Therefore, we first evaluated the three different file retrieval applications ccngetfile, ccncat and ccncatchunks2 (results not depicted) and chose the last one because it showed the best performance.…”
Section: A Measurement Setupmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Even though NULL mode does not involve the process of segment authentication, it has a limited transmission performance. That is because in CCNx protocol execution content name encoding/decoding procedure is significantly time consuming [26,27]. TLDA with 1024-bit (resp., 2048-bit) key size provides the best performance of 76.506 Mbps (resp., 75.956 Mbps) when MHT size is 16 (resp., 64) while CCNx with 1024-bit (resp., 2048-bit) key size offers the best performance of 55.356 Mbps (resp., 40.571 Mbps) when MHT size is 32 (resp.…”
Section: Computational Performance and Overhead Analysismentioning
confidence: 99%