Abstract
In ATM networks, a user should negotiate at connection set-up a traffic contract which includes traffic characteristics and requested QoS. The traffic characteristics currently considered are the Peak Cell Rate, the Sustainable Cell Rate, the Intrinsic Burst Tolerance and the Cell Delay Variation (CDV) tolerance(s). The values taken by these traffic parameters characterize the so-called “Worst Case Traffic” that is used by CAC procedures for accepting a new connection and allocating resources to it. Conformance to the negotiated traffic characteristics is defined, at the ingress User to Network Interface (UNI) and at subsequent Inter Carrier Interfaces (ICIs), by algorithmic rules based on the Generic Cell Rate Algorithm (GCRA) formalism. Conformance rules are implemented by policing mechanisms that control the traffic submitted by the user and discard excess traffic. It is therefore essential to set traffic characteristic values that are relevant to the considered cell stream, and that ensure that the amount of non-conforming traffic is small. Using a queueing model representation for the GCRA formalism, several methods are available for choosing the traffic characteristics. This paper presents approximate methods and discusses their applicability. We then discuss the problem of obtaining traffic characteristic values for a connection that has crossed a series of switching nodes. This problem is particularly relevant for the traffic contract components corresponding to ICIs that are distant from the original source.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.References
Final Report COST 224, Performance evaluation and design of multi-service networks, ed. J. Roberts (1991).
Interim Report COST 242, Cell delay variation in ATM Networks, eds. A. Gravey and S. Blaabjerg (1994).
ITU-T Recommendation I.371, Traffic control and congestion control in B-ISDN, ITU-T SG13, Geneva (1995).
ATM Forum, Traffic control and congestion control, Draft Baseline Document (1993).
L. Kleinrock.Queueing Systems, Vol 2 (Wiley, 1976).
M. D'Ambrosio and R. Melen, On the modification of the cell streams within an ATM network, COST 242 TD(93) 005.
J.L. van den Berg and J.A.C. Resing, The change of traffic characteristics in ATM networks, COST 242 TD(92)040.
S. Blaabjerg, Estimating the effect of cell delay variation by an application of the heavy limit theorem, COST 242 TD(92) 017.
S. Blaabjerg, Cell delay variation in a FIFO queue: a diffusion approach, High Speed Networks, Raleigh (1993).
P. Boyer, Définition d'un contrôle de congestion pour un réseau temporel asynchrone, Internal Report (in French), NT/LAA/RSM/165 (1990).
A. Dupuis and G. Hébuterne, Dimensionning the continuous state leaky bucket for geometric arrivals, COST 242 TD(94) 020.
F. Guillemin, P. Boyer, A. Dupuis and L. Romœf, Peak rate enforcement in ATM networks,Infocom'92, Florence (1992), Session 6A.
F.P. Kelly, Mathematical models of multiservice networks, In: ed. D. M. Titterington,Complex Stochastic Systems and Engineering, The Institute of Mathematics and its Applications, Conference held September 1993, to appear.
F.P. Kelly and P.B. Key. Dimensioning playout buffers for an ATM network,11th UK Teletraffic Symposium, Cambridge (1994), (IEE, London, 1994).
J.F.C Kingman. Inequalities in the theory of queues, J. R. Statist. Soc. B 32, (1970) 102–110.
G. Niestegge, The “Leaky Bucket” policing method in the ATM network, Int. J. Digital and Analogue Commun. Syst. 3(1990).
S.M. Ross, Bounds on the delay distribution in GI/G/1 queues, J. Appl. Prob. 11 (1974) 417–421.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Gravey, A., Romœuf, L., Sevilla, K. et al. Models for setting ATM parameter values. Telecommunication Systems 5, 85–107 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02109728
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02109728