有损网络拥塞控制的QoS分析

Aaron E. Cohen
{"title":"有损网络拥塞控制的QoS分析","authors":"Aaron E. Cohen","doi":"10.1109/UEMCON.2017.8249070","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper develops the analytical models necessary to compare the Quality of Service (QoS) when using different lossy network congestion control techniques. The first route model shows that the frequency (FRQ) drop method is superior to the random (RND) drop method when the perceived difference in QoS (ΔQoS) from the full transmission mode to the lower transmission mode is small and that the ratio (x) of number of shrunk packets to 1 dropped packet is low. Afterwards, this model is extended to show the QoS when packet loss concealment is used. Later, this model is extended to show the QoS when buffering is allowed. Final results show that if the constraint (QoSWB — AVGQoSPLC > x x (QoSWB — QoSNB)) is met then the RND method achieves worse QoS than the FRQ method. This result holds with and without buffering.","PeriodicalId":403890,"journal":{"name":"2017 IEEE 8th Annual Ubiquitous Computing, Electronics and Mobile Communication Conference (UEMCON)","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analytical analysis of QoS for lossy network congestion control\",\"authors\":\"Aaron E. Cohen\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/UEMCON.2017.8249070\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This paper develops the analytical models necessary to compare the Quality of Service (QoS) when using different lossy network congestion control techniques. The first route model shows that the frequency (FRQ) drop method is superior to the random (RND) drop method when the perceived difference in QoS (ΔQoS) from the full transmission mode to the lower transmission mode is small and that the ratio (x) of number of shrunk packets to 1 dropped packet is low. Afterwards, this model is extended to show the QoS when packet loss concealment is used. Later, this model is extended to show the QoS when buffering is allowed. Final results show that if the constraint (QoSWB — AVGQoSPLC > x x (QoSWB — QoSNB)) is met then the RND method achieves worse QoS than the FRQ method. This result holds with and without buffering.\",\"PeriodicalId\":403890,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2017 IEEE 8th Annual Ubiquitous Computing, Electronics and Mobile Communication Conference (UEMCON)\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2017 IEEE 8th Annual Ubiquitous Computing, Electronics and Mobile Communication Conference (UEMCON)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/UEMCON.2017.8249070\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2017 IEEE 8th Annual Ubiquitous Computing, Electronics and Mobile Communication Conference (UEMCON)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/UEMCON.2017.8249070","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文建立了在使用不同的有损网络拥塞控制技术时比较服务质量(QoS)所需的分析模型。第一个路由模型表明,当感知到的QoS (ΔQoS)从全传输模式到低传输模式的差异较小,压缩包数与丢弃包数之比(x)较低时,频率(FRQ)丢弃法优于随机(RND)丢弃法。然后,将该模型扩展到使用丢包隐藏时的QoS。随后,对该模型进行了扩展,以显示允许缓冲时的QoS。最终结果表明,如果满足约束条件(qswb - AVGQoSPLC > x x (qswb - qsnb)),则RND方法的QoS较FRQ方法差。不管有没有缓冲,这个结果都成立。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Analytical analysis of QoS for lossy network congestion control
This paper develops the analytical models necessary to compare the Quality of Service (QoS) when using different lossy network congestion control techniques. The first route model shows that the frequency (FRQ) drop method is superior to the random (RND) drop method when the perceived difference in QoS (ΔQoS) from the full transmission mode to the lower transmission mode is small and that the ratio (x) of number of shrunk packets to 1 dropped packet is low. Afterwards, this model is extended to show the QoS when packet loss concealment is used. Later, this model is extended to show the QoS when buffering is allowed. Final results show that if the constraint (QoSWB — AVGQoSPLC > x x (QoSWB — QoSNB)) is met then the RND method achieves worse QoS than the FRQ method. This result holds with and without buffering.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信