Advertisement

MBAC: Impact of the Measurement Error on Key Performance Issues

  • Anne Nevin
  • Peder J. Emstad
  • Yuming Jiang
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6164)

Abstract

In Measurement Based Admission Control (MBAC), the decision of accepting or rejecting a new flow is based on measurements of the current traffic situation. Since MBAC relies on measurements, an in-depth understanding of the measurement error and how it is affected by the underlying traffic is vital for the design of a robust MBAC. In this work, we study how the measurement error impacts the admission decision, in terms of false rejections and false acceptances, and the consequence this has for the MBAC performance. A slack in bandwidth must be added to reduce the probability of false acceptance. When determining the size of this slack, the service provider is confronted with the trade-off between maximizing useful traffic and reducing useless traffic. We show how the system can be provisioned to meet a predefined performance criteria.

Keywords

Blocking Probability Acceptance Region False Rejection Admission Decision Rejection Region 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Breslau, L., Jamin, S., Shenker, S.: Comments on the performance of measurement-based admission control algorithms. In: IEEE INFOCOM (2000)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Moore, A.W.: Measurement-based management of network resources. Technical Report, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 OFD, United Kingdom (April 2002)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Grossglauser, M., Tse, D.N.: A time-scale decomposition approach to measurement-based admission control. IEEE/ACM Trans. Networking 11(4), 550–563 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dziong, Z., Juda, M., Mason, L.G.: A framework for bandwidth management in ATM networks - aggregate equivalent bandwidth estimation approach. IEEE/ACM Trans. Networking 5(1), 134–147 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Nevin, A., Emstad, P., Jiang, Y., Hu, G.: Quantifying the uncertainty in measurements for mbac. In: Oliver, M., Sallent, S. (eds.) EUNICE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5733, pp. 1–10. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    van de Meent, R., Mandjes, M., Pras, A.: Gaussian traffic everywhere? In: IEEE International Conference on Communications, ICC 2006, June 2006, vol. 2, pp. 573–578 (2006)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Iversen, V.B.: Teletraffic engineering and network planning, course Textbook (May 2006)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gibbens, P.K.R.J., Kelly, F.P.: A decision-theoretic approach to call admission control in atm networks. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications (JSAC) 13(6), 1101–1114 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rabinovich, S.G.: Measurement Errors and Uncertaintees, 2nd edn. Springer, New York (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Roberts, J.W.: Internet traffic, qos and prising. Proceedings of the IEEE 92(9) (2004)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Schwartz, M.: Broadband integrated networks. In: Becker, P. (ed.), Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs (1996)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anne Nevin
    • 1
  • Peder J. Emstad
    • 1
  • Yuming Jiang
    • 1
  1. 1.Centre for Quantifiable Quality of Service in Communication Systems (Q2S)Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU)TrondheimNorway

Personalised recommendations