A Methodology for Deriving Per-Flow End-to-End Delay Bounds in Sink-Tree DiffServ Domains with FIFO Multiplexing

  • Luciano Lenzini
  • Linda Martorini
  • Enzo Mingozzi
  • Giovanni Stea
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3280)


In a DiffServ architecture, packets with the same marking are treated as an aggregate at core routers, independently of the flow they belong to. Nevertheless, for the purpose of QoS provisioning, derivation of upper bounds on the delay of individual flows is required. In this paper, we consider the derivation of per-flow end-to-end delay bounds in DiffServ domains where peregress (or sink-tree) FIFO aggregation is in place. We expose a general methodology to derive delay bounds, and we instantiate it on a case study. We show that the methodology yields a tighter bound than those available from the literature, and we express a worst-case scenario for the case study network, in which the bound is actually achieved.


Admission Control Delay Bound Core Router Ingress Node Arrival Curve 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Le Boudec, J.-Y., Thiran, P.: Network Calculus. In: Thiran, P., Le Boudec, J.-Y. (eds.) Network Calculus. LNCS, vol. 2050, p. 3. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Fidler, M., Sander, V.: A Parameter Based Admission Control for Differentiated Services Networks. Elsevier Computer Networks 44, 463–479 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Charny, A., Le Boudec, J.-Y.: Delay Bounds in a Network with Aggregate Scheduling. In: Crowcroft, J., Roberts, J., Smirnov, M.I. (eds.) QofIS 2000. LNCS, vol. 1922, pp. 1–13. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bennett, J.C.R., et al.: Delay Jitter Bounds and Packet Scale Rate Guarantee for Expedited Forwarding. IEEE/ACM Trans. Networking 10(4), 529–540 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Blake, S., Black, D., Carlson, M., Davies, E., Wang, Z., Weiss, W.: An Architecture for Differentiated Services. IETF RFC 2475 (1998)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Davie, B., et al.: An Expedited Forwarding PHB. IETF RFC 3246 (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Choi, B., Bettati, R.: Endpoint Admission Control: Network Based Approach. In: Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), Phoenix, Az, pp. 227–235 (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lenzini, L., Martorini, L., Mingozzi, E., Stea, G.: End-to-End Per-Flow Delay Bounds in Sink-Tree DiffServ Domains with FIFO Multiplexing. Tech. Rep., Univ. of Pisa (2004)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Le Faucher, F., Davie, B., Davari, S., Krishnan, R., Cheval, P., Heinanen, J.: Multi Protocol Label Switching (MPLS) Support of Differentiated Services. IETF RFC 3270 (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Braden, R., Clark, D., Shenker, S.: Integrated Services in the Internet Architecture: An Overview. IETF RFC 1633 (1994)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lenzini, L., Mingozzi, E., Stea, G.: Delay Bounds for FIFO Aggregates: A Case Study. In: Karlsson, G., Smirnov, M. (eds.) QofIS 2003. LNCS, vol. 2811, pp. 31–40. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luciano Lenzini
    • 1
  • Linda Martorini
    • 1
  • Enzo Mingozzi
    • 1
  • Giovanni Stea
    • 1
  1. 1.Dipartimento di Ingegneria dell’InformazioneUniversity of PisaPisaItaly

Personalised recommendations