{"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":"717 1","pages":"0"},"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}
引用次数: 1
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.
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。