4.4Interfering Stream Files [Les]
The network traffic files used by the simulator are all of a standard packet capture format commonly known as pcap, as defined in file pcap.h (version 2.4) of libpcap. See http://wiki.wireshark.org/Development/LibpcapFileFormat . Usually the files have been captured at the endpoints of the network at client devices. The goal of these files is that they be used as traffic sources for input into the simulation model.
These files have been anonymously captured by a variety of researchers and from a variety of sources as real examples of representative types of packet traffic. The actual sources of the data cannot always be disclosed. In general, the files are a reflection of the traffic patterns observed and have had the payloads stripped to protect the privacy and rights of the actual content as well as to keep the overall file size small. Note that even though the traffic source files omit the payloads, size information is maintained so that the full traffic is modeled by the simulation. The simulator does pass payload data, if present in the pcap file.
In addition to payload stripping, the pcap files have had a number of processing steps:
-
Flow separation: The files are split into upstream (toward the core) and downstream (toward the client endpoint) files.
-
Bandwidth analysis: The files are analyzed as to their overall and average bandwidth over finite time periods. As reference files, the microscopic and macroscopic bandwidth characteristics must be understood so that they can be applied reasonably to the various simulation test cases. In particular, the bandwidth with characteristics of the files are highly dependent on factors such as the overall bandwidth capabilities and rate limitations of the network path, behavior and rate adaptation of higher layer network protocols.
-
Smoothing: At a microscopic level, bandwidth analysis of some pcap files have been observed to exhibit micro-bursting behavior that can result because of characteristics of the networks stack or because of the application protocols with the availability of abundant bandwidth. [perhaps an example can be shown from OTT2] A potential of these microbursts is that even though the overall bandwidth of the file is reasonable, the instantaneous bandwidth requirement can overwhelm link or memory capacities of the scenario under test. This can be alleviated either through external smoothing of the file or by the rate shaping parameters in the simulation configuration file.
-
Bandwidth scaling: The standard pcap files are specific captures intended to be a representative proxy of network usage. Since they are generic in nature, the playback into the simulator is made by bandwidth scaling. This is accomplished by temporal dilation, i.e. playback of packets by a constant scale factor faster or slower to achieve the desired network usage.
[we probably want figures of the bandwidth of the "reference files". i probably already have this. it's actually several related groups since the BW ranges between kbits and ~15Mbit]
Quality of service QoS [xx] is a critical part of real networks and of each simulation scenario. Traffic flows are assigned a priority that is essential in practical access networks to ensure that higher priority traffic from managed services is carried in preference to lower priority traffic. The simulator has 7 priority levels and no per-class bandwidth reservation. The simulation test cases are set as follows:
1: (highest priority) Managed voice traffic
2: Managed IPTV-type video traffic
3: Unused
4: Unused
5: Unused
6: Unused
7: (lowest priority) Best effort, OTT video, VoIP, P2P
[QoS assigned as managed or residual bandwidth (or does that belong elsewhere in the Standard?)] - perhaps a section on the design philosophy of test cases.
not specifically document text ...
Test cases have managed and unmanaged services. The managed services were assigned QoS 1 and 2. The remaining over-the-top services are best effort level 7. In the simulation, these OTT services will exhibit packet loss due to network congestion. Typically higher layer mechanisms such as TCP or retransmission / forward error correction that go beyond the scope of this standard are used to manage reliable delivery over unreliable networks.
[how described by time series, PDV histogram]
[impairment severity is a function of pcap statistics, number and rate of streams]
[where they came from]
[remember to include telepresence files from Phil H]
[how selected]
[bidirectional]
[how processed: strip payload (or not), optionally scaled, optionally smoothed]
[how described by time series, PDV histogram]
[QoS assigned as managed or residual bandwidth (or does that belong elsewhere in the Standard?)]
[impairment severity is a function of pcap statistics, number and rate of streams]
[files provided on disk]
4.5Simulation Inputs
Input to the simulator is in the form of PCAP files. These files are driven into the simulation as specified by the timestamps in PCAP files. The payload of the PCAP files, if present, is carried along with the packets in the simulation and placed in the output files. The simulation parameter settings can adjust the timing of the packets driven into the simulation, for example to speed up or slow down the playback, or to smooth out unintended burstiness. A full list of the adjustable parameters for the PCAP packet generator is given in [Annex].
[network topology input]
[where pcap files are inserted: artificially all at the start]
Table : Network Model Simulation Input Parameters
Network Element
|
Impairment / Interferer
|
Parameter Range
|
Core
|
|
|
|
Number of Switches
|
3 to 10
|
|
Buffer Size (kB)
|
96
|
|
Rate (Gbit/s)
|
1
|
|
Total Core Link Delay (ms)
|
10 to 300
|
|
|
|
Edge Router
|
|
|
|
Buffer Size (kB)
|
96
|
|
|
|
Access (pick one technology)
|
|
GPON
|
Access Rate Down (Mbit/s)
|
5 to 50
|
|
Access Rate Up (Mbit/s)
|
2 to 35
|
|
Residual BER
|
10-12 to 10-9
|
|
Buffer Size (kB)
|
96
|
|
Delay (ms)
|
1
|
|
|
|
DSL
|
Access Rate Down (Mbit/s)
|
3 to 33
|
|
Access Rate Up (Mbit/s)
|
1 to 3
|
|
Residual BER
|
10-8 to 10-7
|
|
Buffer Size (kB)
|
96
|
|
Delay (ms)
|
1
|
|
|
|
"Modem" / ONT
|
|
|
|
Buffer Size (kB)
|
96
|
|
|
|
Firewall
|
|
|
|
Buffer size
|
96
|
|
|
|
LAN
|
Effective Rate (Mbits/s)
|
100
|
|
|
|
|
Managed Bandwidth
|
|
|
IPTV HD Stream 1 - CBR (qty)
|
|
|
Downstream Rate (Mbit/s)
|
8
|
|
Upstream Rate (Mbit/s)
|
0.01
|
|
Shaping
|
PIR/PBS
|
|
QoS
|
|
|
IPTV HD Stream 2 - VBR (qty)
|
|
|
Downstream Rate (Mbit/s)
|
8
|
|
Upstream Rate (Mbit/s)
|
0.01
|
|
Shaping
|
PIR/PBS
|
|
QoS
|
|
|
IPTV SD Stream 1 - CBR (qty)
|
|
|
Downstream Rate (Mbit/s)
|
2
|
|
Upstream Rate (Mbit/s)
|
0.01
|
|
Shaping
|
PIR/PBS
|
|
QoS
|
|
|
IPTV SD Stream 2 - VBR (qty)
|
|
|
Downstream Rate (Mbit/s)
|
2
|
|
Upstream Rate (Mbit/s)
|
0.01
|
|
Shaping
|
PIR/PBS
|
|
QoS
|
|
|
VoIP/Fax (qty)
|
|
|
Downstream Rate (Mbit/s)
|
0.064
|
|
Upstream Rate (Mbit/s)
|
0.064
|
|
QoS
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residual Bandwidth
|
|
|
Peer-to-peer Rate Down
|
1.89
|
|
Peer-to-peer Rate Up
|
0.768
|
|
QoS
|
|
|
POP3 Rate Down
|
0.5
|
|
POP3 Rate Up
|
0.02
|
|
QoS
|
|
|
HTTP Rate Down
|
1.7
|
|
HTTP Rate Up
|
0.007
|
|
QoS
|
|
|
Youtube Rate Down
|
7
|
|
Youtube Rate Up
|
0.128
|
|
QoS
|
|
|
OTT2 Rate Down
|
1
|
|
OTT2 Rate Up
|
0.025
|
|
QoS
|
|
|
VoIP/Fax Rate Down
|
0.064
|
|
VoIP/Fax Rate Down
|
0.064
|
|
QoS
|
|
Share with your friends: |