Science China Information Sciences

, Volume 56, Issue 11, pp 1–13 | Cite as

Towards an end-to-end delay analysis of LEO satellite networks for seamless ubiquitous access

Research Paper Special Focus

Abstract

LEO satellite networks, with moderate propagation delay and low terminal power requirement, are considered as a promising solution to providing global seamless access services for ubiquitous computing. In order to satisfy the requirement of accessing computing resource for users, end-to-end delays should be bounded for a continual and reliable connectivity. But given dynamic topology and non-uniform distribution of terrestrial users, end-to-end delays within LEO satellite networks are liable to fluctuate. Hence, to examine the delay constraint, an analytical model based on a tandem queue is established under a hot-spot traffic pattern, which is unfavorable for bounded delays. The departure interval moments of a target flow are calculated and fitted for the next link as input parameters, from which queuing delays under cross flows are iteratively obtained. The analytical results show that this model is able to depict the influence by the traffic pattern with satisfying accuracy, which is valuable for the design of routing schemes in satellite networks.

Keywords

LEO satellite networks delay analysis tandem hot-spot traffic 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Friedewald M, Raabe O. Ubiquitous computing: an overview of technology impacts. Telematics Inform, 2011, 28: 55–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Yu P, Ma X X, Cao J N, et al. Application mobility in pervasive computing: a survey. Pervasive Mob Comput, 2013, 9: 2–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nishiyama H, Kudoh D, Kato N, et al. Load balancing and QoS provisioning based on congestion prediction for GEO/LEO hybrid satellite networks. P IEEE, 2011, 99: 1998–2007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kawamoto Y, Nishiyama H, Kato N, et al. Assessing packet delivery delay in multi-layered satellite networks. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Communication, Ottawa, 2012. 3311–3315Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hermenier R, Kissling C, Donner A. A delay model for satellite constellation networks with inter-satellite links. In: Proceedings of International Workshop on Satellite and Space Communication, Tuscany, 2009. 3–7Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wu F G, Sun F C, Sun Z Q, et al. Performance evaluation on a double-layered satellite network (in Chinese). J Comput R&D, 2005, 42: 259–265MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hong Z G, Wang Y B, Shi M Y. A SPN-Based Delay Analysis of LEO Satellite Networks. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2008. 598–606Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jurski J, Wozniak J. Routing decisions independent of queuing delays in broadband LEO networks. In: Proceedings of IEEE Global Telecommunication Conference, Honolulu, 2009. 1–6Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mohorcic M, Svigelj A, Kandus G, et al. Demographically weighted traffic flow models for adaptive routing in packetswitched non-geostationary satellite meshed networks. Comput Netw, 2003, 43: 113–131CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fischer W. The Markov-modulated Poisson process (MMPP) cookbook. Perform Eval, 1993, 18: 149–171CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Min G Y, Wu Y L, Mohamed O K, et al. Performance modeling and analysis of interconnection networks with spatio-temporal bursty traffic. In: Proceedings of IEEE Global Telecommunication Conference, Honolulu, 2009. 1–6Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ferng H W, Chao C C, Peng C C. Path-wise performance in a tree-type network: per-stream loss probability, delay, and delay variance analyses. Perform Eval, 2007, 64: 55–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Heindl A. Decomposition of general queuing networks with MMPP inputs and customer losses. Perform Eval, 2003, 51: 117–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sun J, Modiano E. Routing strategy for maximizing throughput in LEO satellite networks. IEEE J Sel Area Commun, 2004, 22: 273–285CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ferng H W, Chang J F. Connection-wise end-to-end performance analysis of queuing networks with MMPP inputs. Perform Eval, 2001, 43: 39–62CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Casale G, Zhang E Z, Smirni E. Trace data characterization and fitting for Markov modeling. Perform Eval, 2010, 67: 61–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science China Press and Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Science and Technology on Integrated Information System Laboratory, Institute of SoftwareChinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina
  2. 2.University of Chinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations