On the Impact of Link Scheduling on End-to-End Delays in Large Networks

We seek to provide an analytical answer whether the impact of link scheduling algorithms on end-to-end delays diminishes on long network paths. The answer is provided through a detailed multi-hop delay analysis, which is applicable to a broad class of scheduling algorithms, and which can account for statistical multiplexing. The analysis is enabled by two contributions: (1) We derive a function that can characterize the available bandwidth at a buffered link for various scheduling algorithms. This characterization is sharp enough to provide necessary and sufficient conditions for satisfying worst-case delay bounds at a single link; (2) We obtain end-to-end delay bounds by solving an optimization problem, in which the service received on a multi-hop path is subsumed into a single function. Since our analysis captures the properties of a broad group of schedulers in a single parameter, it can provide insight how the choice of scheduling algorithms impacts end-to-end delay bounds. An important finding of this paper is that schedulers may exhibit noticeable performance differences which persist in a network setting with long paths.

[1]  Hui Zhang,et al.  Service disciplines for guaranteed performance service in packet-switching networks , 1995, Proc. IEEE.

[2]  Rene L. Cruz,et al.  A calculus for network delay, Part I: Network elements in isolation , 1991, IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory.

[3]  Paolo Giacomazzi,et al.  Closed-form analysis of end-to-end network delay with Markov-modulated Poisson and fluid traffic , 2009, Comput. Commun..

[4]  Shivendra S. Panwar,et al.  A survey of envelope processes and their applications in quality of service provisioning , 2006, IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials.

[5]  Cheng-Shang Chang,et al.  Performance guarantees in communication networks , 2000, Eur. Trans. Telecommun..

[6]  M. Frans Kaashoek,et al.  A measurement study of available bandwidth estimation tools , 2003, IMC '03.

[7]  Domenico Ferrari,et al.  Exact admission control for networks with a bounded delay service , 1996, TNET.

[8]  Desmond P. Taylor,et al.  A Generalized Processor Sharing Approach to Flow Control in Integrated Services Networks: The SingleNode Case , 2007 .

[9]  Edward W. Knightly,et al.  Inter-class resource sharing using statistical service envelopes , 1999, IEEE INFOCOM '99. Conference on Computer Communications. Proceedings. Eighteenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies. The Future is Now (Cat. No.99CH36320).

[10]  Abhay Parekh,et al.  A generalized processor sharing approach to flow control in integrated services networks-the single node case , 1992, [Proceedings] IEEE INFOCOM '92: The Conference on Computer Communications.

[11]  Jean-Yves Le Boudec,et al.  Network Calculus , 2001, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[12]  Wilton R. Abbott,et al.  Network Calculus , 1970 .

[13]  Vijay Sivaraman,et al.  Providing end-to-end statistical delay guarantees with earliest deadline first scheduling and per-hop traffic shaping , 2000, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2000. Conference on Computer Communications. Nineteenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (Cat. No.00CH37064).

[14]  Edward W. Knightly,et al.  Coordinated multihop scheduling: a framework for end-to-end services , 2002, TNET.

[15]  Abhay Parekh,et al.  A generalized processor sharing approach to flow control in integrated services networks: the single-node case , 1993, TNET.

[16]  Chengzhi Li,et al.  A Network Calculus With Effective Bandwidth , 2007, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[17]  Florin Ciucu,et al.  On Q(H log H) Scaling of Network Delays , 2007, IEEE INFOCOM 2007 - 26th IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications.

[18]  Florin Ciucu,et al.  Scaling properties of statistical end-to-end bounds in the network calculus , 2006, IEEE Transactions on Information Theory.

[19]  Yashar Ghiassi-Farrokhfal,et al.  Output characterization of constant bit rate traffic in FIFO networks , 2009, IEEE Communications Letters.

[20]  Roch Guérin,et al.  Efficient network QoS provisioning based on per node traffic shaping , 1996, TNET.

[21]  Luciano Lenzini,et al.  Delay bounds for FIFO aggregates: a case study , 2003, Comput. Commun..

[22]  Jens B. Schmitt,et al.  Delay Bounds under Arbitrary Multiplexing: When Network Calculus Leaves You in the Lurch... , 2008, IEEE INFOCOM 2008 - The 27th Conference on Computer Communications.

[23]  Matthew Andrews,et al.  Probabilistic end-to-end delay bounds for earliest deadline first scheduling , 2000, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2000. Conference on Computer Communications. Nineteenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (Cat. No.00CH37064).

[24]  Thomas Bonald,et al.  Statistical Guarantees for Streaming Flows Using Expedited Forwarding. , 2001, INFOCOM 2001.

[25]  Ness B. Shroff,et al.  Network decomposition: theory and practice , 2005, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[26]  Yong Liu,et al.  Stochastic Network Calculus , 2008 .

[27]  Rene L. Cruz,et al.  SCED+: efficient management of quality of service guarantees , 1998, Proceedings. IEEE INFOCOM '98, the Conference on Computer Communications. Seventeenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies. Gateway to the 21st Century (Cat. No.98.

[28]  Moshe Sidi,et al.  Performance and stability of communication networks via robust exponential bounds , 1993, TNET.

[29]  Catherine Rosenberg,et al.  The Burstiness Behavior of Regulated Flows in Networks , 2005, NETWORKING.

[30]  Chaiwat Oottamakorn,et al.  Statistical service assurances for traffic scheduling algorithms , 2000, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.