Fundamental trade-offs in aggregate packet scheduling

In this paper we investigate the fundamental trade-offs in aggregate packet scheduling for support of guaranteed delay service. In particular, we study the relationships between the worst-case edge-to-edge delay (i.e., the maximum delay experienced by any packet across a network domain), the (maximum) allowable link utilization level of a network and the ``sophistication/complexity'' of aggregate packet scheduling employed by a network. In our study, besides the simple FIFO packet scheduling algorithm, we consider two classes of aggregate packet scheduling algorithms: the static earliest time first} (SETF) and dynamic earliest time first (DETF). In both classes additional control information is encoded in the packet header for scheduling purpose: in the class of SETF, packets are stamped with its entry time at the network edge, and they are scheduled in the order of their (network entry) time stamps at a router; in the class of DETF, the packet time stamps are modified at certain routers as packets traverse them. Through these two classes of aggregate packet scheduling, we show that, with additional time stamp control information encoded in the packet header for scheduling purpose, we can significantly increase the (maximum) allowable link utilization level of a network, and at the same time reduce the worst-case edge-to-edge delay bound. These results illustrate the fundamental trade-offs in aggregate packet scheduling algorithms and shed light on their provisioning power in support of guaranteed delay service.

[1]  Yiwei Thomas Hou,et al.  Fundamental trade-offs in aggregate packet scheduling , 2001, Proceedings Ninth International Conference on Network Protocols. ICNP 2001.

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

[3]  Baruch Awerbuch,et al.  Universal stability results for greedy contention-resolution protocols , 1996, Proceedings of 37th Conference on Foundations of Computer Science.

[4]  Jean-Yves Le Boudec,et al.  Delay jitter bounds and packet scale rate guarantee for expedited forwarding , 2001, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2001. Conference on Computer Communications. Twentieth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Society (Cat. No.01CH37213).

[5]  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.

[6]  Jean-Yves Le Boudec,et al.  Delay Bounds in a Network with Aggregate Scheduling , 2000, QofIS.

[7]  Kedar Poduri The 'Virtual Wire' Per-Domain Behavior , 2000 .

[8]  Srinivasan Keshav,et al.  An Engineering Approach to Computer Networking: ATM Networks , 1996 .

[9]  Zheng Wang,et al.  An Architecture for Differentiated Services , 1998, RFC.

[10]  Yiwei Thomas Hou,et al.  Virtual time reference system: a unifying scheduling framework for scalable support of guaranteed services , 2000, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications.

[11]  Van Jacobson,et al.  An Expedited Forwarding PHB , 1999, RFC.