Status reporting versus non status reporting dynamic bandwidth allocation

Feknous, Moufida Rebiha; Gravey, Annie; Guyader, Bertrand Le; Gosselin, Stéphane

doi:10.1109/nof.2015.7333289

Cited by 8 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…ONUs can send their pending data only within the limits of the allocated grants which are specified in the Upstream Bandwidth Map (USBWmap) field. These grants are transmitted by the OLT to the different ONUs in the downstream traffic frames [3]. They are updated regularly in each DBA cycle which represents the duration that covers all transmissions from all ONUs and may vary depending on the state of the ONUs packet queues [2].…”

Section: Upstream Bandwidth Alloaction Mechanismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The activity status of each container can be obtained either through a status or non-status reporting mechanism. Fig.2 provides a simplified schematic of the Status Reporting (SR-DBA) mode [3] [9]. In the Non-Status Reporting (NSR-DBA) mode, the ONUs data queue occupancy information is not provided to the OLT.…”

Section: Upstream Bandwidth Alloaction Mechanismmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They define the specific objectives expected and the QoS that a client wishes to obtain from the service provider. The main parameters specified in the customer SLA are respectively the Committed Information Rate (CIR), the Excess Information Rate (EIR), and the Peak Information Rate (PIR) [3]. The CIR defines the guaranteed bandwidth provided by the network when delivering the data frames.…”

Section: Upstream Bandwidth Alloaction Mechanismmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Dynamic reallocation of SLA parameters in passive optical network based on clustering analysis

Frigui

Lemlouma

Gosselin

et al. 2018

2018 21st Conference on Innovation in Clouds, Internet and Networks and Workshops (ICIN)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Upstream Bandwidth Alloaction Mechanismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Upstream Bandwidth Alloaction Mechanismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Upstream Bandwidth Alloaction Mechanismmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Dynamic reallocation of SLA parameters in passive optical network based on clustering analysis

Frigui

Lemlouma

Gosselin

et al. 2018

2018 21st Conference on Innovation in Clouds, Internet and Networks and Workshops (ICIN)

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…41 In the first method, the OLT does not consult the ONUs and estimates the bandwidth requirement of the ONUs itself from the intensity of US traffic and allocates bandwidth according to its estimates. 41 In the first method, the OLT does not consult the ONUs and estimates the bandwidth requirement of the ONUs itself from the intensity of US traffic and allocates bandwidth according to its estimates.…”

Section: Pon Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To know the bandwidth demand of the TCONT k (i) during the DBA process, the XGPON standard supports 2 polling methods: status reporting (SR-DBA) and non-status reporting (NSR-DBA). 41 In the first method, the OLT does not consult the ONUs and estimates the bandwidth requirement of the ONUs itself from the intensity of US traffic and allocates bandwidth according to its estimates. In second case, the ONUs record the traffic arrivals in a queue for each TCONT k (i) and send the queue reports to OLT using the DBRu field of US frames along with the US traffic frames.…”

Section: Pon Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comprehensive bandwidth utilization and polling mechanism for XGPON

Butt

Idrus²,

Zulkifli³

et al. 2017

Int J Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

For an efficient utilization of the upstream bandwidth in passive optical network, a dynamic bandwidth assignment mechanism is necessary as it helps the service providers in provisioning of bandwidth to users according to the service level agreements. The scheduling mechanism of existing schemes, immediate allocation with colorless grant and efficient bandwidth utilization (EBU), does not assign the surplus bandwidth to a specific traffic class and only divides it equally among the optical network units (ONUs). This results in overreporting of ONU bandwidth demand to the optical line terminal and causes wastage of bandwidth and increase in delays at high traffic loads. Moreover, the EBU also assigns the unused bandwidth of lightly loaded ONU queues to the overloaded queues through an Update operation. This Update operation has a flaw that it borrows the extra bandwidth to a queue in the current service interval, if the queue report is higher than its service level agreement and refunds in next service interval. This borrow-refund operation causes reduced bandwidth allocation to the lower priority classes and increases their delay and frame loss. This study improves both these weaknesses. The simulation results show that the proposed scheme uses bandwidth efficiently and reduces mean upstream delay of type-2 (T2) traffic class by 38% and type-3 (T3) up to 150% compared to immediate allocation with colorless grant at a cost of up to 10% higher delay for T2. However, T4 performance improves by 400% compared to EBU with slight increase in delay for T2 traffic class. Overall, it shows a balanced performance for all the traffic classes and minimizes the bandwidth waste per cycle as well as the frame loss rate.

show abstract