Wireless Networks

, Volume 21, Issue 6, pp 1985–1997 | Cite as

An IP cross-layer scheduler with closed-loop control for QoS provisioning in NGNs

  • Gianmarco PanzaEmail author
  • Sara Grilli


Next-generation networks (NGNs) will support quality of service over a mixed wired and wireless IP-based infrastructure. A relative model of service differentiation in differentiated services architecture is a scalable solution for delivering multimedia traffic. However, considering the dynamic nature of radio channels specifically, it is difficult to achieve a given service provisioning working at the IP and lower layers separately as in the classical approach without a run-time adaptation of the system towards the target quality. This work describes an IP cross-layer scheduler able to support a Proportional Differentiation Model (PDM) for delay guarantees also over wireless. The key idea is to leverage feedbacks from the lower layers about the actual delays experienced by packets in order to tune at run-time the priority of the IP service classes in a closed-loop control with the objective of supporting a PDM at the interface on the whole, considering the cumulative latency across multiple layers, as relevant for the end-user. A simulation analysis demonstrates the prominent improvements in reliability and robustness of the proposal in the case of time-variant performance of the MAC and PHY layers with respect to the classical non-cross-layer approach and open-loop control. Furthermore, considerations on the required functionality and likely deployment scenarios highlight the scalability and backward compatibility of the designed solution, addressing a sustainable approach and smooth migration to NGNs.


Cross-layer design DiffServ Feedback NGN PDM QoS Wireless 



This work has been carried out within the framework of the IST CONCERTO project, partially supported by the European Commission under the Contract FP7 No. INFSO-ICT-288502.


  1. 1.
    ITU Y.2001. (2004). General overview of NGN.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mustill, D., & Willis, P. J. (2005). Delivering QoS in the next generation network—a standards perspective. BT Technology Journal, 23(2), 48–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Blake, S., Black, D., Carlson, M., Davies, E., Wang, Z., & Weiss, W. (1998). An architecture for Differentiated Services. IETF Request for Comments (RFC 2475)
  4. 4.
    Nicholas, K., Blake, S., Baker, F., & Black, D. (1999). Definition of the Differentiated Services Field (DS Field) in the IPv4 and IPv6 Headers. IETF Request for Comments (RFC 2474)
  5. 5.
    Dovrolis, C., & Ramanathan, P. (1999). A case for relative Differentiated Services and the Proportional Differentiation Model. IEEE Network, 13(5), 26–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dovrolis, C., Stiliadis, D., & Ramanathan, P. (2002). Proportional differentiated services: delay differentiation and packet scheduling. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 10(1), 12–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lai, Y.-C., & Li, W.-H. (2003). A novel scheduler for proportional delay differentiation by considering packet transmission time. IEEE Communications Letters, 7(4), 189–191.MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Simon, C., Vidacs, A., Moldovan, I., Torok, A., Ishibashi, K., Koike, A., & Ichikawa, H. (2002). End-to-end relative Differentiated Services for IP networks. In Proceedings of ISCC Seventh International Symposium on Computers and Communications (pp. 783–788).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Piri, E., Uitto, M., Vehkaperä, J., & Sutinen, T. (2010). Dynamic cross-layer adaptation of scalable video in wireless networking. In Proceedings of IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference (GLOBECOM 2010) (pp. 1–5).Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Panza, G., & Grilli, S. (2013). An IP cross-layer scheduler for relative QoS support in NGNs. To be published in Proceedings of the IEEE Globecom 2013.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Szu, Y.-C. (2009). Using debt mechanism to achieve proportional delay and loss differentiation in a wireless network with a multi-state channel. In Proceedings of ISWPC 2009, 4th International Symposium on Wireless Pervasive Computing (pp. 1–6).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Yuan, X., Kai, C., & Nahrstedt, K. (2004). Distributed end-to-end proportional delay differentiation in wireless LAN. Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Communications, 7, 4367–4371.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Levine, William S. (Ed.). (1996). The control handbook. New York: CRC Press. ISBN 978-0-8493-8570-4.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hossain, M., Hassan, M., & Sirisena, H. R. (2004). Adaptive resource management in multi-service mobile wireless cellular networks using feedback control. In Proceedings of the IEEE 60th Vehicular Technology Conference (vol. 6, pp. 3984–3988).Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kabamba, P. T., Meerkov, S. M., Stark, W. E., & Tang, C. Y. (2001). Feedforward control of data rate in wireless networks. In Proceedings of the 40th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (vol. 2, pp. 1043–1048).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Zhou, H., Hoang, D., Nhan, P., & Mirchandani, V. (2004). Introducing feedback congestion control to a network with IEEE 802.11 wireless LAN. In Proceedings of the IEEE wireless telecommunications symposium (pp. 61–66).Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Åström K. J., & Hägglund, T. (1995). PID controllers.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Chen, J. L., & Chen, N. K. (2007). Feedback QoS control scheme for wireless network applications. Elsevier Computer and Electrical Engineering.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wu, D., & Negi, R. (2003). Effective capacity: A wireless link model for support of quality of service. IEEE Transactions on Wireless Communication, 2, 630–643.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Chang, Cheng-Shang, & Thomas, J. (1995). Effective bandwidth in high speed digital networks. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 13, 1091–1100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Heinanen, J., Baker, F., Weiss, W., & Wroclawski, J. (1999). Assured forwarding PHB group. IETF Request for Comments (RFC 2597)
  22. 22.
  23. 23.
  24. 24.
  25. 25.
    GPP TS 36.300 v. 8.11.0 (2010). Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRA) and Evolved Universal Terrestrial Radio Access (E-UTRAN); Overall Description; Stage 2.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    GPP TS 23.203 v. 8.8.0 (2009). Policy and charging control architecture.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
  28. 28.
    Umlauft, M., & Reichl, P. (2009). Getting network simulation basics right—a note on seed setting effects for the ns-2 random number generator. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, 44, 215–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Digital Platform and Pervasive ICT DivisionCEFRIEL - Politecnico di MilanoMilanItaly

Personalised recommendations