首页> 外文OA文献 >TCP throughput guarantee in the DiffServ Assured Forwarding service: what about the results ?
【2h】

TCP throughput guarantee in the DiffServ Assured Forwarding service: what about the results ?

机译:DiffServ保证转发服务中的TCP吞吐量保证:结果如何?

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Since the proposition of quality of service(QoS) architectures by the Internet Engineering Task Force(IETF), the interaction between TCP and the QoS services has been intensively studied. This paper proposes to look forward to the results obtained in terms of TCP throughput guarantee in the Diff-Serv assured forwarding (DiffServ/AF) service and to present an overview of the different proposals to solve the problem. It has been demonstrated that the standardized IETF DiffServ conditioners such as the tokenudbucket color marker and the time sliding window color maker were not good TCP traffic descriptors. Starting with this point, several propositions have been made, and most of them present new marking schemes in order to replace or improve the traditional token bucket color marker. The main problem is that TCP congestion control is not designed to work with the AF service. Indeed, both mechanisms are antagonists.udTCP has the property to share in a fair manner theudbottleneck bandwidth between flows while DiffServ network provides a level of service that is controllable and predictable. In this paper, we build a classification of all the propositions made during the past few years and compare them. As a result, we will see that these conditioning schemes can be separated into three sets of action levels and that the conditioning at the network edge level is the most accepted one. We conclude that the problem is still unsolved and that TCP, conditioned or not conditioned, remains inappropriate for the DiffServ/AF service.
机译:由于Internet工程任务组(IETF)提出了服务质量(QoS)体系结构的建议,因此已经深入研究了TCP与QoS服务之间的交互。本文建议期待在Diff-Serv保证转发(DiffServ / AF)服务中以TCP吞吐量保证的方式获得的结果,并提出解决该问题的各种建议的概述。已经证明,标准化的IETF DiffServ调节器(例如令牌 udbucket颜色标记和时间滑动窗口颜色生成器)不是良好的TCP流量描述符。从这一点开始,已经提出了几个主张,并且它们中的大多数提出了新的标记方案,以替代或改进传统的令牌桶颜色标记。主要问题是TCP拥塞控制不适用于AF服务。实际上,这两种机制都是对立的。udTCP具有以公平的方式共享流之间的瓶颈带宽的属性,而DiffServ网络提供了可控制和可预测的服务水平。在本文中,我们对过去几年中提出的所有主张进行了分类,并进行了比较。结果,我们将看到这些调节方案可以分为三组动作级别,并且网络边缘级别的调节是最被接受的。我们得出的结论是,问题仍然没有解决,有条件或没有条件的TCP仍然不适合DiffServ / AF服务。

著录项

  • 作者

    Lochin Emmanuel; Anelli Pascal;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2009
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 {"code":"en","name":"English","id":9}
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号