Xin Wang - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 56
About This Presentation
Title:

Xin Wang

Description:

Revenue from the traditional connectivity services (raw bandwidth) is declining ... VoIP, VPN, Applications Hosting etc ... one out of a spectrum of services? ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:46
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 57
Provided by: nemo9
Category:
Tags: hosting | services | wang | xin

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Xin Wang


1
Resource Negotiation, Pricing and QoS
for Adaptive Multimedia Applications
  • Xin Wang
  • With Henning Schulzrinne
  • Internet Real -Time Laboratory
  • Columbia University
  • http//www.cs.columbia
    .edu/xinwang/RNAP.html

2
Todays IP Networks
Service Level Agreements (SLA) are negotiated
based on Application Specific Needs bandwidth,
loss, delay, jitter, availability, price
ISP Networks
Applications
IP Network
Service
User
SCOPE
  • Growth of new IP services and applications with
    different bandwidth and quality of service
    requirements
  • Presents opportunities and challenges for service
    providers

3
The needs of Next Generation Service
Providers
  • Revenue from the traditional connectivity
    services (raw bandwidth) is declining
  • Increase revenue by offering innovative IP
    services
  • Deliver high-margin, differentiated services
  • VoIP, VPN, Applications Hosting etc
  • Gain competitive advantage by deploying new
    services more quickly, placing a premium on time
    to market and time to scale
  • Reduce cost and operation complexity
  • Evolve from static network management to dynamic
    service provisioning
  • Reduce costs by automating network and service
    management

4
Internet Structure
5
NORDUnet Traffic Analysis
6
NORDUnet Traffic Analysis
  • Results
  • All access links (interconnect ISPs or connect
    private networks to ISPs), including
    trans-Atlantic links, can get congested.
  • Average utilization is low 20-30
  • Peak utilization can be high up to 100
  • Congestion Ratio (peak/average) as high as 5.
  • Peak duration can be very long
  • Chicago NAP congested once in 8/00, lasted 7
    hours.
  • TeleGlobe links congested every workday in 8/00
    and 9/00
  • Reasons Frequent re-configuration and
    upgradingLoad balancing to protect own users.

7
Solution - Over-provisioning?
  • Add enough bandwidth for all applications in
    access network / backbone
  • Will over-provisioning be sufficient to avoid
    congestion?
  • How much bandwidth is enough to meet diverse user
    requirements?
  • No intrinsic upper limit on bandwidth use
  • How much does it cost to add capacity?

8
Bandwidth Pricing
  • Reality leased bandwidth price has not been
    dropping consistently and dramatically.
  • Facts
  • 300 mile T1 price
  • 1987 10,000/month
  • 1992 4,000/month
  • 1998 6,000/month (thanks to high Internet
    demand)
  • 100-mile cabling cost in 1998 65,000
  • Links connecting ISPs are very expensive

9
Bandwidth Pricing (cont.)
  • Facts
  • International Frame Relay with 256-kbps
    thousands dollars a month.
  • Transit DS-3 link 50,000/month between
    carriers.
  • Transit OC-3 link 150,000/month between
    carriers.
  • Chicago NAP
  • 3,900/month/DS-3,
  • 4,700/month/OC-3.

Bandwidth may be cheap, but not free Higher-speed
connection -- higher recurring monthly
costs. Option - manage the existing bandwidth
better, with a service model which uses bandwidth
efficiently.
10
A More Efficient Service Model
  • Quality of Service (QoS)
  • Condition the network to provide predictability
    to an application even during high user demand
  • Provide multiple levels of QoS to meet diverse
    user requirements
  • How efficiently does a QoS mechanism manage
    bandwidth? How can a user select one out of a
    spectrum of services? How much does a user need
    to pay for QoS?
  • Application adaptation
  • Source rate adaptation based on network
    conditions can avoid congestion and lead to
    efficient bandwidth utilization
  • How about also QoS? Why would an application
    adapt?

11
A More Efficient Service Model (contd)
  • Service selection and dynamic resource
    negotiation
  • An Integrated mechanism by which the user can
    select one out of a spectrum of services
  • Network commits resources for short intervals -
    better response to changes in network conditions
    and user demand allows better QoS support for
    adaptive applications
  • Usage-,QoS-,demand-sensitive pricing
  • Allow network to price services based on
    resources consumed, and allocate resources
    based on user willingness-to-pay
  • Give user incentive to select appropriate service
    based on requirements, adapt demand during
    network resource scarcity in response to increase
    in price

12
What We Add to Enable This Model
  • A dynamic resource negotiation protocol RNAP
  • An abstract Resource Negotiation And Pricing
    protocol
  • Enables user and network (or two network domains)
    to dynamically negotiate multiple services with
    different QoS characteristics
  • Enables network to formulate and communicate
    prices and charges
  • Lightweight and flexible embedded in other
    protocols, e.g., RSVP, or implemented
    independently
  • Ensures service predictability commit service
    and price for an interval
  • Supports multi-party negotiation senders,
    receivers, or both
  • Reliable and scalable
  • A demand-sensitive pricing model
  • Enables differential charging for supporting
    multiple levels of services services priced to
    reflect the cost and long-term user demand
  • Allows for congestion pricing to motivate user
    adaptation

13
What we add... (contd)
  • Demonstrate a complete resource negotiation
    framework (RNAP, pricing model, user adaptation)
    on test-bed network
  • Simulations show significant advantages relative
    to static resource allocation and fixed pricing
  • Much lower service blocking rate under resource
    contention
  • Service assurances under large or bursty offered
    loads, without highly conservative provisioning
  • Higher perceived user benefit and higher network
    revenue

14
Outline
  • RNAP Architecture and Messaging
  • Pricing models
  • Existing model
  • Usage and congestion-based pricing model
  • Pricing mechanism
  • User adaptation
  • Test-bed demonstration of Resource Negotiation
    Framework
  • Simulation and discussion of Resource Negotiation
    Framework

Resource Negotiation Framework
15
Protocol Architectures Centralized
Host Resource Negotiator
RNAP Messages
Network Resource Negotiator
NRN
NRN
NRN
HRN
HRN
Access Domain - A
Edge Router
Access Domain - B
Internal Router
Intra-domain messages
Transit Domain
RNAP-C
16
Protocol Architectures Distributed
RNAP Messages
HRN
LRN
LRN
LRN
LRN
LRN
LRN
LRN
LRN
HRN
LRN
LRN
LRN
Access Domain - A
LRN
LRN
Edge Router
Access Domain - B
Internal Router
Transit Domain
RNAP-D
17
RNAP Messages
Query Inquires about available services, prices
Query
Quotation
Quotation Specifies service availability,
accumulates service statistics,
prices
Reserve
Commit
Reserve Requests services and resources,
Modifies earlier requests
Periodic negotiation
Quotation
Commit Admits the service request at a specific
price or denies it.
Reserve
Commit
Close Tears down negotiation session
Close
Release Releases the resources
Release
18
Message Aggregation (RNAP-D)
Turn on router alert
Turn off router alert
Sink-tree-based aggregation
19
Message Aggregation (RNAP-C)
NRN
Sink-tree-based aggregation
20
RNAP Message Aggregation Summary
  • Aggregation when senders share the same
    destination network
  • Messages merged by source or intermediate domains
  • Messages de-aggregated at destination border
    routers (RNAP-D), or NRNs (RNAP-C)
  • Original messages sent directly to
    destination/source domains without interception
    by intermediate RNAP agents aggregate message
    reserves and collects price at intermediate
    nodes/domains
  • Overhead Reduction
  • Processing overhead, storage of states

21
Block Negotiation (network-network)
  • Aggregated resources are added/removed in large
    blocks to minimize negotiation overhead and
    reduce network dynamics

Bandwidth
time
22
Outline
  • RNAP Architecture and Messaging
  • Pricing models
  • Comparison of model
  • Usage and congestion-based pricing model
  • Pricing mechanism
  • User adaptation
  • Test-bed demonstration of Resource Negotiation
    Framework
  • Simulation and discussion of Resource Negotiation
    Framework

Resource Negotiation Framework
23
Pricing in Current Internet
  • Access-rate-dependent flat charge (AC)
  • Simple, predictable
  • Difficult to compromise between access speed and
    cost
  • No incentive for users to limit usage
    congestion
  • Usage-based charge
  • Volume-dependent charge (V)
  • Time-base charge (T)
  • work better for uniform per-time unit resource
    demands, e.g., telephone
  • Access charge Usage-based charge
  • Per-hour charge after certain period of use, or
    per-unit charge after some amount of traffic
    transmitted.
  • Flat charge for basic service, usage charge for
    extra bandwidth or premium services

24
Two Volume-based Pricing Strategies
  • Fixed-Price (FP) fixed unit volume price
  • FP-FL per-byte charge are same for all services
  • FP-PR service class dependent
  • FP-T time-of-day dependent
  • FP-PR-T FP-PR FP-T
  • During congestion higher blocking rate OR higher
    dropping rate and delay
  • Congestion-dependent-Price (CP) FP
    congestion-sensitive price component
  • CP-FL, CP-PR, CP-T, CP-PR-T
  • During congestion users maintain service by
    paying more OR reducing sending rate OR
    switching to lower service class
  • Reduced rate of service blocking, packet dropping
    and delay

25
Important Time Scales
  • Technical levels of interaction
  • Monetary levels of interaction

atomic
short-term
medium-term
long-term
Retransmission
Flow Control
Error Handling
Reservation
Resource
Capacity
Planning
Scheduling
Feedback
Policing
Routing
time
Congestion
Time-of-day
Pricing
Flat Rates
Pricing
26
Pricing Strategies
  • Holding price and charge based on cost of
    blocking other users by holding bandwidth even
    without sending data
  • phj ? j (pu j - pu j-1) , chij (n) ph j r
    ij (n)? j
  • Usage price and charge optimize the providers
    profit
  • max Sl x j (pu1 , pu2 , , puJ ) puj - f(C),
    s.t. r (x (pu2 , pu2 , , puJ )) ? R

  • cuij (n) pu j v ij (n)
  • Congestion price and charge drive demand to
    supply level (two mechanisms)

27
Usage Price for Differentiated Service
  • Usage price based on cost of class bandwidth
  • lower target load (higher QoS) -gt higher per-unit
    bandwidth price
  • Parameters
  • pbasic basic rate for fully used bandwidth
  • ? j expected load ratio of class j
  • xij effective bandwidth consumption of
    application i
  • Aj constant elasticity demand parameter
  • Price for class j puj pbasic / ? j
  • Demand of class j xj ( puj ) Aj / puj
  • Effective bandwidth consumption xe j ( puj )
    Aj / ( puj ? j )
  • Network maximizes profit
  • max Sl (Aj / pu j ) pu j - f (C), puj
    pbasic / ? j , s. t. Sl Aj / ( pu j ? j ) ? C
  • Hence pbasic Sl Aj / C , puj Sl Aj /(C? j)

28
Congestion price first mechanism - Tatonnement
  • Tatonnement process (CPA-TAT) network applies
    congestion charge proportional to excess demand
    relative to target utilization
  • pc j (n) min pcj (n-1) ? j (Dj, Sj) x
    (Dj-Sj)/Sj,0 , pmaxj
  • ccij (n) pc j v ij (n)

29
Congestion price second mechanism - M-bid
Second-price Auction
  • Auction models in literature
  • Assume unique bandwidth/price preference, one bid
  • Service uncertainty not know about high demand
    until rejected
  • Higher setup delay, signaling burst, life-time
    auction, user response to auction results not
    considered
  • M-bid auction model
  • User bids (bandwidth, price) for a number of
    bandwidths, bids obtained by sampling utility
    function.
  • Network selects highest bids (one per user)
    charges highest rejected bid price
  • During high demand lower bandwidth (higher price
    per unit bandwidth) bids get selected more users
    served
  • Inter-auction admission to reduce setup delay
  • Support auction for a period to help for
    congestion control

30
Outline
  • RNAP Architecture and Messaging
  • Pricing models
  • Comparison of model
  • Usage and congestion-based pricing model
  • Pricing mechanism
  • User adaptation
  • Test-bed demonstration of Resource Negotiation
    Framework
  • Simulation and discussion of Resource Negotiation
    Framework

Resource Negotiation Framework
31
Rate Adaptation of Multimedia System
  • Enable multimedia applications to gain optimal
    perceptual value based on the network conditions
    and user profile.
  • A Host Resource Negotiator (HRN) negotiates
    services with network on behalf of a multimedia
    system.
  • Utility function users preference or
    willingness to pay

Cost
U1
U2
Utility/cost/budget
U3
Budget
Bandwidth
32
Example Utility Function
  • User defines utility at discrete bandwidth, QoS
    levels
  • Utility is a function of bandwidth at fixed QoS
  • An example utility function U (x) U0 ? log
    (x / xm)
  • U0 perceived (opportunity) value at minimum
    bandwidth
  • ? sensitivity of the utility to bandwidth
  • Function of both bandwidth and QoS
  • U (x) U0 ? log (x / xm) - kd d - kl l , for x
    ? xm
  • kd sensitivity to delay
  • kl sensitivity to loss

33
Two Rate Adaptation Models
  • User adaptation under CPA-TAT (tatonnement-based
    pricing)
  • Optimize perceived surplus subject to budget and
    application requirements U Si Ui (xi (Tspec,
    Rspec)
  • max Sl Ui (xi ) - Ci (xi) , s. t. Sl Ci (xi)
    ? b , xmini ? xi ? xmaxi
  • With the example utility functions
  • max Sl U0i ?i log (xi / xmi ) - kdi d - kl
    i l - pi xi , s.t. Sl pi xi ? b , x ? xm , d
    ? D, l ? L
  • Without budget constraint x i ?i / pi
  • With budget constraint x i bi / pi, with b
    i b (? i / Sl ? k )
  • User adaptation under CPA-AUC (second-price
    auction)
  • Submit M-bid derived by sampling utility
    function adapt rate based on allocated
    bandwidth/QoS
  • Adaptation of applications in multimedia system
  • Distribute bid/allocated bandwidth among
    applications for optimal overall surplus

34
Stability and Oscillation Reduction
  • Congestion-sensitive pricing has been shown to be
    stable, see references.
  • Oscillation reduction
  • Users re-negotiate only if price change exceeds
    a given threshold
  • Network update price only when traffic change
    exceeds a threshold negotiate resources in
    larger blocks between domains

35
Outline
  • RNAP Architecture and Messaging
  • Pricing models
  • Comparison of model
  • Usage and congestion-based pricing model
  • Pricing mechanism
  • User adaptation
  • Test-bed demonstration of Resource Negotiation
    Framework
  • Simulation and discussion of Resource Negotiation
    Framework

Resource Negotiation Framework
36
Test-bed Architecture
  • Demonstrate functionality and performance
    improvement
  • blocking rate, average loss and delay, price
    stability, perceived media quality
  • Host
  • HRN negotiates resources for a system
  • Host processes (HRN, VIC, RAT) communicate
    through Mbus
  • Network
  • FreeBSD 3.4 ALTQ 2.2, CBQ extended for DiffServ
  • NRNs
  • Process RNAP messages
  • Admission control, monitor service statistics,
    compute price
  • At edge, dynamically configure the conditioners
    and form charge
  • Inter-entity signaling RNAP

VIC
RAT
Mbus
HRN
RNAP
NRN
37
Functions of Routers
  • Interior routers per-class policing, e.g,
    TBMETER (in/out) for a class
  • Edge routers flow conditioning/policing based on
    SLA

38
Network Resource Negotiator (NRN)
  • Monitor statistics and provide price for each
    service class
  • Measurement-based admission control
  • predict future demand, update congestion price
    based on predictions

39
Network States
  • Per-class bandwidth and price variations
  • Reduction in blocking due to adaptation

40
Adaptive Wireless Terminal
  • WAP development over Nokia Toolkit 2.0
  • Currently cell phone services
  • Flat pricing and best effort when congestion,
    all users get worse quality - coarse voice, busy
    signal, cut off
  • Using our solution
  • Optionally provide real-time pricing information,
    e.g., every 10 minutes or every call (lower
    average charge for reward)
  • Customers choices
  • pay a premium to have best quality
  • pay less by tolerating worse quality
  • back off to call another time.
  • Reduce the blocking rate of overall network

41
Outline
  • RNAP Architecture and Messaging
  • Pricing models
  • Comparison of model
  • Usage and congestion-based pricing model
  • Pricing mechanism
  • User adaptation
  • Test-bed demonstration of Resource Negotiation
    Framework
  • Simulation and discussion of Resource Negotiation
    Framework

Resource Negotiation Framework
42
Simulation Design
  • Performance comparison
  • Network with dynamic services and rate-adaptive
    users versus network with non-adaptive users
  • Fixed price policy (FP) (usage price holding
    price) versus congestion price based adaptive
    service (CPA) (usage price holding price
    congestion price)
  • Four groups of experiments
  • (1) Effect of traffic burstiness (2) Effect of
    traffic load (3) Load balance between classes
    (4) Effect of admission control
  • Engineering metrics bottleneck traffic arrival
    rate, average packet loss and delay, user
    request blocking probability
  • Economic metrics average and total user
    benefit, end-to-end price and its standard
    deviation, network revenue

43
Simulation Models
  • Network Simulator (NS-2)
  • Weighted Round Robin (WRR) scheduler
  • Three classes EF, AF, BE
  • EF tail dropping, limited to 50 packets load
    threshold 40, delay bound 2 ms, loss bound 10-6
  • AF RED-with-In-Out (RIO), limited to 100
    packets load threshold 60, delay bound 5 ms,
    loss bound 10-4
  • BE Random Early Detection (RED), limited to 200
    packets load threshold 90, delay bound 100 ms,
    loss bound 10-2
  • Sources mix of on-off and Pareto on-off (shape
    parameter 1.5)
  • Negotiation period 30 s, session length 10 min

44
Simulation Architecture
Topology 1 (60 users)
Topology 2 (360 users)
45
Effect of Traffic Burstiness
Average packet loss
Average packet delay
46
Effect of Traffic Burstiness (contd)
Price average and standard deviation of AF class
Average user benefit
47
Effect of Traffic Load (contd)
Average packet loss
Average packet delay
48
Effect of Traffic Load
Average user benefit
Price average and standard deviation of AF class
49
Load Balance between Classes (contd)
Average packet delay
Average packet loss
50
Load Balance between Classes
Variation over time of the price of AF class
Ratio of AF class traffic migrating through class
re-selection
51
Effect of Admission Control
Average packet loss
Average packet delay
52
Effect of Admission Control (contd.)
Average and standard deviation of AF class price
User request blocking rate
53
Conclusions
  • RNAP
  • Supports dynamic service negotiation, mechanisms
    for price and charge collation, auction bids and
    results distribution
  • Allows for both centralized and distributed
    architectures
  • Supports multi-party negotiation senders,
    receivers, or both
  • Can be stand-alone, or embedded inside other
    protocols
  • Reliable and scalable
  • Pricing model
  • Consider resource consumption, long-term user
    demand and short-term traffic fluctuation use
    congestion-sensitive component to motivate user
    demand adaptation during resource scarcity
  • Application adaptation
  • Maximize user perceptual value, tradeoff between
    quality and expenditure

54
Conclusions (contd)
  • M-bid Auction Model
  • Serves more users than comparable schemes, and
    has less signaling overhead, greater certainty of
    service availability, and lower setup delay
  • Simulation results
  • Differentiated service requires different target
    loads in each class
  • CPA policy coupled with user adaptation
    effectively limit congestion, provide lower
    blocking rate, higher user satisfaction and
    network revenue than with the FP policy
  • Both auction and tatonnement process can be used
    to calculate the congestion price auction scheme
    gains higher perceived user benefit and network
    utilization at cost of implementation complexity
    and setup delay
  • Without admission control, service assurance by
    restricting the load to the targeted level with
    admission control, blocking rate and price
    dynamics get reduced

55
Conclusions (contd)
  • Allowing service class migration further
    stabilizes price
  • Users with different demand elasticity share
    bandwidth proportional to their willingness to
    pay
  • Even a small proportion of user adaptation
    results in a significant performance improvement
    for the entire user population
  • Performance of CPA further improves as the
    network scales and more connections share the
    resources
  • Future work
  • Propose light-weight resource management protocol
  • Cost distribution in QoS-enhanced multicast
    network
  • Pricing in the presence of alternatives path or
    competitive network
  • User valuation models for different QoS
  • Resource provision in wireless environment

56
Some References
  • X. Wang, H. Schulzrinne, Auction or T?tonnement
    - Finding Congestion Prices for Adaptive
    Applications, submitted.
  • X. Wang, H. Schulzrinne, Pricing Network
    Resources for Adaptive Applications in a
    Differentiated Services Network, In Proceeding
    of INFOCOM'2001, April 22-26, Anchorage,
    Alaska.
  • X. Wang, H. Schulzrinne, An Integrated Resource
    Negotiation, Pricing, and QoS Adaptation
    Framework for Multimedia Applications, IEEE
    JSAC, vol. 18, 2000. Special Issue on Internet
    QoS.
  • X. Wang, H. Schulzrinne, Performance Study of
    Congestion Price based Adaptive Service, In
    Proc. International Workshop on Network and
    Operating System Support for Digital Audio and
    Video (NOSSDAV'00), Chapel Hill, North Carolina,
    Jun. 2000.
  • X. Wang, H. Schulzrinne, Comparison of Adaptive
    Internet Multimedia Applications, IEICE
    Transactions on Communications, Vol. E82-B, No.
    6, pp. 806--818, June 1999.
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com