Upload
rockys11
View
264
Download
2
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Advanced Network Management (Fall 2007)
Professor: James Won-Ki Hong
Chen Bin Kuo (20077202)
Young J. Won (20063292)
DPNM Lab.
Revisited
VoIP, Data, & Other Traffic Models
TPS Models
IPTV Live Traffic Model
IPTV VoD Traffic Model
Conclusion
04/13/23 2
DPNM Lab. 04/13/23 3
Details
Bundled Services Traffic Selection & Survey on Previous Models
Measurement Analysis on Selected Bundled Service Applications
Measurement Paper (IPTV)
Model Formulation
Traffic Impact & Demand Analysis
Final Report
DPNM Lab.
Problem?Lack of effective combinational models for analyzing traffic impact and demand in bundled services environment
Traffic demand analysis in bundled services Traffic impact analysis with existing traffic
Goal? Traffic monitoring and analysis of bundled service applications Traffic modeling formulation for combined traffic
04/13/23 4
DPNM Lab.
Link performance summary
04/13/23 5
Capture summary
DPNM Lab.
The D&P type completes its download with initial traffic bursts The streaming type show low yielding bandwidth through
the entire running time
04/13/23 6
DPNM Lab.
Asymmetric traffic delivery pattern 60~90 bytes in size for signaling purpose to acknowledge the stuffed (1500
bytes) video packets Upload performance shows no impact on the overall quality of IPTV STB,
unlike P2P IPTV
04/13/23 7
DPNM Lab.
Traffic bandwidth fluctuation Watching two consecutive episodes 7 Mbps vs. 2 Kbps No channel surfing traffic burst, unlike multicast model
This implies that there could be much simpler representation of IPTV traffic models
04/13/23 8
DPNM Lab.
Measurement conditions Location: San Francisco, USA Broadband access: Cable STB: MegaTV Viewing duration: 30 minutes / 120 minutes
Quick observations Buffering delay in about every 5 minutes
Occasional frame stoppage Below minimum throughput bound (3.5 Mbps vs. 6 Mbps) Fluctuation vs. Constant
0 5 10 15 20 251.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.0 Download Throughput - MegaTV over Cable, USA
Time (Minutes)
Th
ro
ug
hp
ut
(Mb
ps
)
Down
04/13/23 9
DPNM Lab.
The bandwidth at the client domain does not correspond to the required SD or HD transfer ratios
The proposed formulas describe the IPTV VoD services by D&P delivery architecture which has not been proposed in any other work
The traffic burst due to channel surfing is negligible in this VoD architecture
The running time of each channel is fixed and known The occurrence of VoD traffic is not continuous but an independent discrete
event
Channel viewing time does not necessarily coincide with the packet transmission time between the server and STB
04/13/23 10
DPNM Lab.
Initialization(viewers, program files)Initialization(viewers, program files)
Choose viewers randomly(number of viewers is Poisson distribution)
Viewers choose the program file (Zipf distribution)
Calculate bandwidth demand from active viewers
Check viewers states(downloading, playing, finishing)
Simulation ends(time is up)Simulation ends(time is up)
1 round = 1 minute1 round = 1 minute
04/13/23 11
DPNM Lab.
Parameter Description
Maximum active viewers 200
Mena number of requests by viewers 5 (request/minute)
Total Simulation Duration 200 minutes
04/13/23 12
File size (Mbytes) 2000 1500 1000 500 250 200 200 200 200 200
Playing Duration (Minutes)
120 80 60 30 15 10 10 10 10 10
Popularity 11.38% 17% 34.1% 8.53% 6.82% 5.7% 4.88% 4.27% 3.8% 3.4%
Access Network FTTB FTTH xDSL Cable
Downloading Rate(Mbps)
10 11 6 7
Popularity 20% 10% 60% 10%
• Assumptions• Viewer behavior is uniform• Once the viewer chose the program file, the
viewer stayed until the program file ends• # of requests per unit time by viewers
follows Poisson distribution• Popularity of program files follow Zipf
distribution• These can be more realistic if we have the
real values.
DPNM Lab. 04/13/23 13
( ) ( ) ( )j jj
B t D t t (1)
, if ( )
0, otherwise
l jk jk kl
j
r T t TD t
(2)
kjk
l
f
r (3)
FTTH
FTTBl
Cable
xDSL
r
rr
r
r
(4)
jk jk kC T o
(5)
1ll
p
(6)
1kk
p
(7)
k
cp
k
(8)
,( )
,,
( )!
tm
tt
eP m
m
(9)
,[ ]tE m
(10)
Notation Description
kf File size of program file k, where 1,2,3...k
lr Downing rate by media l, where
, , ,l FTTH FTTB Cable xDSL
lp Popularity of medium l
kp Popularity of program file k
,tm Number of requests by viewers during time period
,t t
Mean number of requests by viewers per unit time
jkT The time that viewer j started to download program file k
kl The duration of downing program file k by medium l
ko Playing duration of program file k
jkC The time that viewer j stopped to play program k (channel change)
( )jD t The bandwidth demand of user j at time t
( )j t A function of t, which is 1 if viewer j is on at time t, otherwise 0.
( )B t Total bandwidth demand of an aggregate link at time t
DPNM Lab.
Multicast Live TV simulation vs. VoD simulation Avg. 1000 Mbps vs. Avg. 550 Mbps for 200 viewers Over 2 hours (multiple channel viewings)
Take the average of multiple simulations Test 1-4 and its average
04/13/23 14
DPNM Lab.
TPS Components
VoIP VoIP+Data Data HTTP IPTV Others
Available Choices
1
5
6
1
2
2 2 3
4
3+4
6
Number Methodologies
1. Market projection based
2. Peak-to-average analysis
3. Multicast Live Demand Model
4. VoD Demand Model
5. VoIP Demand Model (Erlang-B,C)
6. Constant Rate
04/13/23 15
DPNM Lab.
VoIP+Data, IPTV Market-based approach, Multicast demand model Market-based approach, VoD demand model Market-based approach, Multi + VoD demand model
VoIP, Data, IPTV Call model, Peak-to-average analysis, Demand model
VoIP, HTTP, UDP, IPTV Call model, Peak-to-average analysis, Constant, Demand model
From two perspectives Edge, Backbone Minimum and Maximum bound Data-dominated IPTV-dominated
04/13/23 16
DPNM Lab.
Contributions A guideline on what to look for and how to handle TPS or
beyond traffic demand analysis A concrete and available set of models are explained
1) Previous VoIP, Data, IPTV, and TPS as a whole for bandwidth demand models
2) Our proposed models for IPTV and simulation3) Combinational model examples
04/13/23 17