Dynamic queue length thresholds for multipriority traffic

Buffer management schemes are needed in shared-memory ATM switches to regulate the sharing of memory among different output port queues and among traffic classes with different loss priorities. Earlier we proposed a single-priority scheme called Dynamic Threshold, in which the maximum permissible queue length is proportional to the unused buffering in the switch. In this paper, we propose and analyze four different ways of incorporating loss priorities into the Dynamic Threshold scheme. The analysis models sources as deterministic fluids.Output port loads may consist of any mixture of loss priorities, and these loads may vary from port to port. We determine how each scheme allocates buffers among the competing ports and loss priority classes, and we also note how this buffer allocation induces an allocation of bandwidth among the loss priority classes at each port. We find that minor variations in the Dynamic Threshold control law can produce dramatically different resource allocations.

[1]  E. L. Hahne,et al.  Dynamic queue length thresholds in a shared memory ATM switch , 1996, Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM '96. Conference on Computer Communications.

[2]  M. Irland,et al.  Buffer Management in a Packet Switch , 1978, IEEE Trans. Commun..

[3]  David Tipper,et al.  Adaptive policies for optimal buffer management in dynamic load environments , 1988, IEEE INFOCOM '88,Seventh Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communcations Societies. Networks: Evolution or Revolution?.

[4]  I. Buffer Management in a Packet Switch , 2022 .

[5]  A. K. Choudhury,et al.  Space priority management in a shared memory ATM switch , 1993, Proceedings of GLOBECOM '93. IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference.

[6]  Jeffrey M. Jaffe,et al.  Bottleneck Flow Control , 1981, IEEE Trans. Commun..

[7]  Abhijit K. Choudhury,et al.  A Simulation Study of Space Priorities in a Shared Memory ATM Switch , 1994, J. High Speed Networks.

[8]  Guy Latouche Exponential Servers Sharing a Finite Storage: Comparison of Space Allocation Policies , 1980, IEEE Trans. Commun..

[9]  E.J. Hernandez-Valencia,et al.  Simulation of a simple loss/delay priority scheme for shared memory ATM fabrics , 1993, Proceedings of GLOBECOM '93. IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference.

[10]  Nicholas F. Maxemchuk,et al.  DQDB networks with and without bandwidth balancing , 1992, IEEE Trans. Commun..

[11]  Ashok K. Agrawala,et al.  On the Design of Optimal Policy for Sharing Finite Buffers , 1984, IEEE Trans. Commun..

[12]  Edward J. Coyle,et al.  An optimal buffer management policy for high-performance packet switching , 1991, IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference GLOBECOM '91: Countdown to the New Millennium. Conference Record.

[13]  John A. Silvester,et al.  Priority Queueing Strategies and Buffer Allocation Protocols for Traffic Control at an ATM Integrated Broadband Switching System , 1991, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun..

[14]  G. J. Foschini,et al.  Sharing Memory Optimally , 1983, IEEE Trans. Commun..

[15]  Hans Kröner,et al.  Priority Management in ATM Switching Nodes , 1991, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun..

[16]  Mark J. Karol,et al.  Queueing in high-performance packet switching , 1988, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun..

[17]  Farouk Kamoun,et al.  Analysis of Shared Finite Storage in a Computer Network Node Environment Under General Traffic Conditions , 1980, IEEE Trans. Commun..

[18]  Roch Guérin,et al.  Optimal Buffer Sharing , 1995, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun..

[19]  Satish K. Tripathi,et al.  Buffer Sharing in Dynamic Load Environment , 1984, IEEE Conference on Computer Communications.