EP1428362A2 - Reseau de communication sans connexions et oriente paquets - Google Patents

Reseau de communication sans connexions et oriente paquets

Info

Publication number
EP1428362A2
EP1428362A2 EP02776703A EP02776703A EP1428362A2 EP 1428362 A2 EP1428362 A2 EP 1428362A2 EP 02776703 A EP02776703 A EP 02776703A EP 02776703 A EP02776703 A EP 02776703A EP 1428362 A2 EP1428362 A2 EP 1428362A2
Authority
EP
European Patent Office
Prior art keywords
node
traffic
network
communication network
access
Prior art date
Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
Withdrawn
Application number
EP02776703A
Other languages
German (de)
English (en)
Inventor
Karl Schrodi
Current Assignee (The listed assignees may be inaccurate. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the list.)
Nokia Solutions and Networks GmbH and Co KG
Original Assignee
Siemens AG
Nokia Siemens Networks GmbH and Co KG
Priority date (The priority date is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the date listed.)
Filing date
Publication date
Application filed by Siemens AG, Nokia Siemens Networks GmbH and Co KG filed Critical Siemens AG
Publication of EP1428362A2 publication Critical patent/EP1428362A2/fr
Withdrawn legal-status Critical Current

Links

Classifications

    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L47/00—Traffic control in data switching networks
    • H04L47/10—Flow control; Congestion control
    • H04L47/24—Traffic characterised by specific attributes, e.g. priority or QoS
    • H04L47/2416—Real-time traffic
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L12/00—Data switching networks
    • H04L12/54—Store-and-forward switching systems 
    • H04L12/56—Packet switching systems
    • H04L12/5601—Transfer mode dependent, e.g. ATM
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L45/00—Routing or path finding of packets in data switching networks
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L45/00—Routing or path finding of packets in data switching networks
    • H04L45/302—Route determination based on requested QoS
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L45/00—Routing or path finding of packets in data switching networks
    • H04L45/302—Route determination based on requested QoS
    • H04L45/308—Route determination based on user's profile, e.g. premium users
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L47/00—Traffic control in data switching networks
    • H04L47/10—Flow control; Congestion control
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L47/00—Traffic control in data switching networks
    • H04L47/10—Flow control; Congestion control
    • H04L47/24—Traffic characterised by specific attributes, e.g. priority or QoS
    • H04L47/2408—Traffic characterised by specific attributes, e.g. priority or QoS for supporting different services, e.g. a differentiated services [DiffServ] type of service
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L47/00—Traffic control in data switching networks
    • H04L47/10—Flow control; Congestion control
    • H04L47/24—Traffic characterised by specific attributes, e.g. priority or QoS
    • H04L47/2441—Traffic characterised by specific attributes, e.g. priority or QoS relying on flow classification, e.g. using integrated services [IntServ]
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L12/00—Data switching networks
    • H04L12/54—Store-and-forward switching systems 
    • H04L12/56—Packet switching systems
    • H04L12/5601—Transfer mode dependent, e.g. ATM
    • H04L2012/5619—Network Node Interface, e.g. tandem connections, transit switching
    • H04L2012/562—Routing
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L12/00—Data switching networks
    • H04L12/54—Store-and-forward switching systems 
    • H04L12/56—Packet switching systems
    • H04L12/5601—Transfer mode dependent, e.g. ATM
    • H04L2012/5629—Admission control
    • H04L2012/5631—Resource management and allocation
    • H04L2012/5632—Bandwidth allocation
    • H—ELECTRICITY
    • H04—ELECTRIC COMMUNICATION TECHNIQUE
    • H04L—TRANSMISSION OF DIGITAL INFORMATION, e.g. TELEGRAPHIC COMMUNICATION
    • H04L12/00—Data switching networks
    • H04L12/54—Store-and-forward switching systems 
    • H04L12/56—Packet switching systems
    • H04L12/5601—Transfer mode dependent, e.g. ATM
    • H04L2012/5638—Services, e.g. multimedia, GOS, QOS
    • H04L2012/5646—Cell characteristics, e.g. loss, delay, jitter, sequence integrity
    • H04L2012/5651—Priority, marking, classes

Definitions

  • the subject matter of the application relates to a node, an access node for a connectionlessly operated, packet-oriented communication network and a connectionlessly operated, packet-oriented communication network.
  • IP Internet Protocol
  • the QoS requirements of a service or application to a network can be defined using various criteria, some of which are given as examples:
  • the throughput characteristic of the digitally coded information ie the required bandwidth or bandwidth characteristic (fixed bandwidth, variable bandwidth [eg with mean value, peak value, 'burstiness factor' or the other characterizing parameters]) and the sensitivity to information losses, -
  • the delay characteristic ie the effects of an absolute delay (running time from the source to the sink of the information) and the sensitivity to fluctuations in the running time or delay (of course, delay fluctuations can be converted into an absolute delay by 'buffering' - this is usually very time-consuming ),
  • Interactive, ie bidirectional real-time communication (voice, video, ...) between people must take into account the responsiveness and the typical communication and dialogue behavior of people.
  • the absolute delay and of course the delay fluctuations
  • the absolute delay are limited to a few hundred milliseconds (eg 200 ms).
  • somewhat higher loss rates can be tolerated, since the ability of the human brain to 'smooth unevenness' is very pronounced in speech and visual perception, and in dialog the attention to small defects is somewhat reduced.
  • real-time dialogues between machines are more complex. Then, under certain circumstances, both the completeness of the information and slight delays close to the physical limit due to the spatial distance (running time approx. 5 ms per 1000 km distance) must be targeted.
  • the general availability of the services is also an essential parameter, which is highly dependent on the network and its properties. Is in the event of an error, e.g. in the event of failure of individual network components or connecting lines, an alternative route is available and how quickly can this be used? Are there any noticeable interruptions for the user and how long are they? Does the network operator or even the user have to intervene in any way to restore the service? The reliability of the network itself and the way in which it can help to bridge errors and possibly restore applications is of great importance.
  • a uniform network must therefore be considered in a qualified manner with the boundary conditions of the type presented here - and of course it should also be as efficient as possible, i.e. with possible can be solved with little effort and economically advantageous.
  • the possible data throughput of such a path is determined by the bandwidth allocated or allocated to it, the delay time for the transport consists of the 'Propagation Delay', ie the distance-dependent runtime on the line, and the 'Switching Delays', ie the inherent processing times that are involved in 'communicating' the digitally coded information ('data') in the network nodes (switches) arise together.
  • 'Transfer' here means converting the information ('data') from a specific incoming line / channel to an outgoing line / channel defined when the connection is established.
  • Both deployment components can generally be assumed to be constant (that is, if the systems are operating properly) for the duration of a communication relationship (with the path switched through or an existing 'connection').
  • the same quasi 'optimal' QoS is specified and achievable ' for all applications (no loss of information, constant, generally relatively small delay, no mix-ups).
  • the 'line' (the path) must be permanently switched (and reserved) for the duration of the communication relationship ('connection'), even if the application uses it very little (eg only sporadically).
  • the reliability / availability can be improved in that the alternate path is switched provided in case of failure rapidly as possible to a pre-, (twice the capacity needed) or a Ers' is atzweg connected immediately (delay and effort, especially if due to a failure many connections are affected at the same time).
  • the packet switching technology ' aims at a better and more flexible use of the resources (bandwidth) through quasi simultaneous use (sharing) of (virtual) lines and channels or switching and transmission media through multiple communication relationships.
  • the two most important representatives are ATM technology (with 'cells' of fixed length and connection-oriented') and IP technology (with packets of variable length and 'connectionless').
  • ATMU is also used by ITU-T under this term and with the aim of a 'broadband ISDN' (B-ISDN).
  • B-ISDN 'broadband ISDN'
  • ATM has very sophisticated mechanisms to provide a wide range of service classes with defined and (on average) guaranteed QoS even with very scarce resources (available bandwidths).
  • the resulting systems and networks become quite complicated and expensive. Sizing and operation require well-trained specialist personnel.
  • ATM works connection-oriented, with a network of 'virtual' paths and channels that are hierarchically assigned to each other. Bandwidths can be reserved individually for a variety of service classes and can also be 'guaranteed' in accordance with the underlying traffic statistics. For this purpose, sophisticated queuing and scheduling mechanisms are used, which are set in each node per path and channel (connection) by means of appropriate parameters. By means of highly complicated dimensioning and connection acceptance regulations, information losses and the variable proportions of the switching delays (which are essentially determined by queuing) can be limited in accordance with statistical rules. An exchange of information units is not to be expected due to the connection orientation. As a result of the connection orientation, however, all inherent complexities have to be run through again when handling error cases. The basic ideas are often very similar to those of circuit switching technology.
  • IP technology is a rather pragmatic approach that has established itself in the data world due to its simple basic mechanisms. It has made massive progress in recent years so that systems and networks based thereon can be compared in terms of their performance (data throughput, control efficiency) with systems based on ATM technology.
  • the success of IP technology is significantly due to the fact that a large part of the services and applications are already in the terminal device on packet-oriented Internet Set up protocols (IP). It is currently forecast that the growth in IP-based services will also be many times greater in the future than in other technologies, which is why it seems likely that all services will be largely migrated to transport over IP-based networks.
  • IP Internet Set up protocols
  • IP networks In contrast to ATM networks, IP networks initially work without a connection and only offer a 'best effort' service, with which even with generous dimensioning of the networks, hardly any predictions and certainly no guarantees for an achievable QoS are possible.
  • IP networks In contrast to ATM networks, IP networks initially work without a connection and only offer a 'best effort' service, with which even with generous dimensioning of the networks, hardly any predictions and certainly no guarantees for an achievable QoS are possible.
  • the following approaches are known:
  • IP network Integrated Services, RSVP. Basically goes end-to-end (from end device to end device) or on sections. Can be used per communication flow or (in the core) also for aggregated flows. Disadvantages: cumbersome, complex, does not scale (control effort), efficiency problems, i.e. Disadvantages similar to ATM technology.
  • MPLS This approach is based on ATM technology. Paths (connections) are set up in the network via which the traffic of individual (generally aggregated) flows is routed in a targeted manner. Often suggested for QoS in conjunction with RSVP and DiffServ. Can also be implemented on the basis of ATM transport. Falls back into the complexity of connection-oriented mechanisms with all associated problems (from bandwidth control to monitoring the presence of the connection). In connection with DiffServ, it should alleviate the problems mentioned above (targeted traffic control via paths). Complexity and problems as with ATM technology.
  • the data packets are classified and marked in an edge device on the basis of their belonging to certain services, applications or communication relationships, etc.
  • (flow-related) access control and monitoring can or should be carried out (e.g. for the availability of resources and compliance with the bandwidth and QoS characteristics registered).
  • the packets then follow the route through the network specified by their packet header information (eg destination address) and the routing protocols, whereby they are treated (eg prioritized) in each node according to their marking with a corresponding 'per-hop behavior'.
  • the 'DiffServ' approach allows the freedom of 'per-hop behavior' within a 'single routing domain', eg the (sub) network of an operator, but requires complete 'edge' treatment between such domains (subnets ).
  • the DiffServ approach cannot prevent temporary and / or local bottlenecks, as there is usually no consideration or coordination with the routes specified by the routing protocols. Usually packets with the same. From the moment they meet at a node, they follow the same set route. This can cause considerable unbalanced loads and bottlenecks in the networks with correspondingly large (queuing) delays up to packet loss. result.
  • the engineering of the networks and routes is, however, a complex task, with the aspect of reliability and availability (eg U routes in the event of a fault) making it more difficult.
  • the object of the invention is to demonstrate a simple, pragmatic and cost-effective approach of how various types of services can be provided reliably, efficiently and in compliance with their specific QoS requirements in IP-based networks.
  • FIG. 1 shows a packet-oriented, connectionless communication network in accordance with the application, which is formed exclusively with edge nodes
  • FIG. 2 shows an embodiment of a network in accordance with the application
  • FIG. 3 shows a possible topology of a real network.
  • connectionlessly operated, packet-oriented communication networks which have a plurality of nodes, between which a number of possible routes via connection sections
  • edge nodes are BNI with regard to a supplied or a forwarded data stream as access edge nodes
  • FIG. 3 shows an interconnection of a data stream belonging to a connection via different paths from an access edge node R to an output edge node S.
  • the invention is based on the following considerations:
  • QoS Quality of service
  • data loss cannot be ruled out (e.g. due to interference (-> bit errors) or frame slippage).
  • Such weaknesses are either tolerable (e.g. in digital telephony) or they are intercepted by appropriate security measures on the same (e.g. by redundancy) or higher layers (e.g. by repetitions) (data technology).
  • the decisive factor is the (subjective) quality perception of the recipient of the information. Real-time, interactive communication involving people, for example, always takes place via their (analogue) sense organs, which can certainly deal with incomplete information
  • QoS does not necessarily require an absolute guarantee (which does not exist anyway, not even using paths and reservations), but compliance with the corresponding specific requirements of the respective service from the perspective of the information recipient.
  • this primarily concerns the type and scope of possible information losses, fixed and / or variable delays and the temporal consistency (sequence) of the information.
  • ATM technology relies on switching nodes and transmission routes dimensioned according to the rules of statistics and the principle of connection-oriented transmission with appropriately reserved resources along the paths, with the correct distribution of resources along the paths using sophisticated and highly complex queuing and scheduling mechanisms to be ensured in the network nodes.
  • Modern high-speed (data) networks work in 'Wire Speed' IP-based networks (Internet) initially only see data packets and treat them a priori all the same: the packet that is first received is also forwarded first, because there are not enough transmission resources available , the packets are initially saved (queuing, buffer) and if there is no more storage space, excess incoming packets are discarded ('best effort' principle).
  • the network nodes in these networks, the so-called routers are traditionally computers which have implemented the complete functionality of analyzing and forwarding the data packets in software programs.
  • a communication network according to the invention comprises the following properties and functionalities (basic idea):
  • It contains mechanisms that, taking into account the respective destination (output port) of the data packets, aim at an even distribution of the traffic load in the network at all times (i.e. at every decision point in the network if possible).
  • the goal of traffic distribution is to achieve the most even possible distribution of the traffic load in the network. It can take place in different granularity, for example on the basis of aggregated traffic flows, per individual traffic flow or on the basis of individual data packets. However, the finer its granularity, the more efficient the distribution will be.
  • the distribution decision should be made "ad hoc" and automatically in every network node.
  • the decision criterion is information that is delivered with the data packets, for example a source / destination address combination, possibly together with further information that is used, for example, to assign a specific traffic flow.
  • FIG. 2 An example to illustrate the basic principle for traffic distribution in a regular network (theory) meshed over different levels (network levels) is shown in FIG. 2.
  • FIG. 3 shows one (of many possible) more specific embodiment (s).
  • the route information for the traffic distribution and the resulting 'branching pattern' can be more or less fixedly preset in the network nodes.
  • meshing will normally not be regular and rather incomplete. There will also always be changes to the network configuration during operation.
  • the traffic distribution itself creates a QoS that is largely balanced for all services and applications. However, without further measures, this still only has the 'best effort' character and the services and applications will suffer more or less noticeably as the load increases, depending on their properties and requirements. This behavior can be significantly improved if the total traffic load in the network is limited according to the actual network capacity. In addition, the bandwidth of the individual network accesses must be considered both on the input and output side and taken into account both separately and in the overall picture.
  • the network can be dimensioned in such a way that certain limit values of the QoS-determining ones determine these boundary conditions Factors (eg packet loss, delay, delay fluctuation) can only be exceeded with a well-defined, sufficiently low statistical probability (network dimensioning).
  • the traffic in a given network can also be limited so that the corresponding boundary conditions are met.
  • a differentiated and adapted to the requirements of the respective service QoS can be done by differentiating and dividing into different traffic classes, which can be treated (prioritized) accordingly.
  • the number of traffic classes is at least two (but there may be more), although strict prioritization is preferred for the treatment in the network nodes (ie at the queuing points).
  • Alternative procedures that also guarantee low-priority traffic classes under all circumstances may have to do this under high loads at the expense of higher-priority traffic (eg weighted fair queuing, WFQ).
  • WFQ weighted fair queuing
  • All data streams are divided into corresponding priority classes according to their requirements. The lowest class is only taken into account when dimensioning the network (within the scope of the expected total traffic volume) and is generally only treated according to the best effort principle.
  • an admissibility check is carried out at the network input (in the input direction) and at the network output (in the output direction). To do this, these data streams must be registered and evaluated at these two points with appropriate parameters (e.g. average data and / or packet rate, peak rate, etc.).
  • the decisions at the entrance and at the exit are independent of each other and the data stream is only allowed if both decisions are positive. As a decision criterion, e.g.
  • threshold value which is determined depending on the capacity of the port, the total network capacity, the desired quality with regard to possible packet delays and losses, etc., the respective priority class and possibly other criteria. It is also conceivable that there are several threshold values for each class on the basis of different evaluation parameters, all of which must be complied with individually or with corresponding interdependencies.
  • the admissibility check is intended on the one hand to limit the total traffic volume of a certain priority class in the network, and on the other hand to limit the associated traffic volume at each individual input and output port. Due to the even distribution of traffic on the network (ideally on a packet basis) and the corresponding preferential treatment (ideally strict priority, ie complete suppression of low-priority traffic if necessary), this traffic is always sufficient with correctly set thresholds Find resources (free link capacity, buffer memory) in the network in order to be able to meet both the delay and loss limit values of its quality requirements.
  • the network can certainly be fully utilized and operated economically, because all bandwidth not used by high-priority traffic can be used by low-priority traffic at any time.
  • Adherence to the registered traffic parameters of the individual data streams must of course be monitored, because within the framework of the traffic distribution, even a single data stream, which slips properly, can significantly disrupt all traffic in the entire network.
  • the monitoring function traffic enforcement, policing
  • the monitoring function can, if necessary, be designed to be relatively insensitive (and inexpensive) because a random, short-term, slight exceedance can be appropriately averaged out by the traffic distribution.
  • the monitoring function is usefully applied to the individual data streams as they were registered. It would also be conceivable to aggregate per port of some kind, whereby only the total limit is checked (but with the unsightly consequence that if an aggregate is exceeded, it would have to be 'randomly' struck and possibly across all the data streams it contains). In principle, any and of course all relevant mechanisms (e.g. leaky bucket) can be used and the same applies to the reaction options (discarding packets, marking packets, switching off / blocking the data stream, ). Marking may also consist in converting the packets violating the agreement (or rather the entire associated data stream) to a lower class or 'best effort'.
  • the principle of traffic distribution (especially if this is done at the packet level) can also be used very advantageously to improve the reliability and availability of the network and services. To do this, it is sufficient for the network nodes to remove the associated link (s) from the branch fan when an error is detected (eg link failed, neighboring node failed) and to continue the distribution only via the remaining links. The decision can be made immediately and autonomously if the fault condition is recognized, and if the fault is recognized as soon as the information is available. If the network is adequately dimensioned, in the worst case, such a reaction will lead to a somewhat more displacement of best effort traffic, but will not result in any loss of quality in high-priority traffic.
  • An advantage could include is that the QoS solution can be added to existing networks, while the existing mechanisms remain unchanged. In this case, however, best effort traffic would not be able to benefit from the basic advantages of traffic distribution.
  • the principle presented is also in a cell-based network, e.g. an ATM network, applicable.
  • the reliability of the network can be improved by self-monitoring mechanisms in the router, especially as part of the distribution development process can be further improved.
  • a type of quick feedback mechanism can also be used between the routers, which e.g. enables problems to be redistributed 'upstream' early in the event of problems occurring somewhere 'downstream'.
  • the admission control can be designed in such a way that it automatically offers the user the next lower class in the case of 'overbooking' a high-priority traffic class.
  • the resequencing function is not implemented in most of today's TCP applications. It is therefore generally, e.g. provided as a standard function at the mains outlet.
  • connectionless operated network does not require any control services for establishing and clearing the connection, no search for a route, no reconfiguration of routes, no recovery of paths in the event of an error, ... - is much easier to control and operate more economically (hardly any administrative intervention is necessary, ' self-organizing ').
  • a preferred embodiment of a 'sample solution' includes the following basic functionalities:
  • connection-free, packet-oriented communication network (according to the minimum requirements according to section 3),

Abstract

Réseau de communication sans connexions et orienté paquets transportant des paquets de données selon le protocole Internet (TCP/IP), qui présente des configurations particulières des noeuds frontières et du réseau lui-même, ce qui permet le respect d'une qualité de service convenue entre l'utilisateur et l'opérateur de réseau.
EP02776703A 2001-09-20 2002-09-20 Reseau de communication sans connexions et oriente paquets Withdrawn EP1428362A2 (fr)

Applications Claiming Priority (5)

Application Number Priority Date Filing Date Title
DE10146349 2001-09-20
DE10146349 2001-09-20
DE10161508 2001-12-14
DE10161508 2001-12-14
PCT/DE2002/003586 WO2003026230A2 (fr) 2001-09-20 2002-09-20 Controle d'acces dans les noeuds frontieres d'un reseau de communication sans connexions et oriente paquets

Publications (1)

Publication Number Publication Date
EP1428362A2 true EP1428362A2 (fr) 2004-06-16

Family

ID=26010188

Family Applications (1)

Application Number Title Priority Date Filing Date
EP02776703A Withdrawn EP1428362A2 (fr) 2001-09-20 2002-09-20 Reseau de communication sans connexions et oriente paquets

Country Status (3)

Country Link
EP (1) EP1428362A2 (fr)
AU (1) AU2002339314A1 (fr)
WO (1) WO2003026230A2 (fr)

Family Cites Families (4)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Publication number Priority date Publication date Assignee Title
FI98773C (fi) * 1994-02-28 1997-08-11 Nokia Telecommunications Oy Menetelmä liikenteen jakamiseksi ATM-tekniikalla toteutetussa tietoliikenneverkossa
DE19923245A1 (de) * 1999-05-20 2000-11-23 Siemens Ag Verfahren zur Auswahl einer Route in einem Kommunikationsnetz
EP1119216A1 (fr) * 2000-01-21 2001-07-25 Siemens Aktiengesellschaft Procédé et dispositif de controle d'acces dans un réseau de communications
DE50105272D1 (de) * 2000-03-10 2005-03-17 Siemens Ag Verfahren zum Verteilen einer Datenverkehrslast eines Kommunikationsnetzes und Kommunikationsnetz zur Realisierung des Verfahrens

Non-Patent Citations (1)

* Cited by examiner, † Cited by third party
Title
See references of WO03026230A3 *

Also Published As

Publication number Publication date
AU2002339314A1 (en) 2003-04-01
WO2003026230A3 (fr) 2003-05-30
WO2003026230A2 (fr) 2003-03-27

Similar Documents

Publication Publication Date Title
EP1428408B1 (fr) Transmission d'informations dans un reseau de communication oriente paquets
DE69916747T2 (de) Verfahren zur Bereitstellung von Dienstgüte in IP-Netzwerken für verzögerungsempfindliche Verkehr
EP1428361B1 (fr) Limitation de trafic pour reseau avec transmission a bon niveau de qualite de service
DE69818846T2 (de) Paketnetzwerk
DE602004001470T2 (de) Verfahren zum Bereitstellen von Diensten mit garantierter Dienstqualität in einem IP-Zugangsnetz
EP1593241B1 (fr) Controle d'acces a un reseau oriente paquet en fonction d'exigences de resilience
DE60112089T2 (de) Verfahren und system zur verwaltung der dienstqualität durch einspeisen von informationen in das paketnetz
DE60115030T2 (de) Kommunikationen unter verwendung von adaptiven mehrraten kodierern/dekodierern
DE10357582A1 (de) Klassenbasierte Ratensteuerung unter Verwendung eines Leaky Bucket mit einer Vielzahl von Grenzwerten
EP0885507A1 (fr) Procede de transmission sur ethernet de paquets de donnees a classes de priorite predefinissables, entre un premier dispositif et au moins un deuxieme dispositif
DE102006012427A1 (de) Eingereihter Netzsimulator
WO2003055154A1 (fr) Procede de transmission de donnees d'application avec une qualite differente
DE102011003321A1 (de) Verfahren zum Erhöhen der Qualität der Datenübertragung in einem paketbasierten Kommunikationsnetz
EP1629642B1 (fr) Procédé de repartition du trafic au moyen de codes de hachage correspondant à une repartition du trafic théorique dans un réseau à commutation par paquets avec acheminement multivoie
DE60305866T2 (de) System und Verfahren zum Anbieten von differenzierten Diensten
WO2004032428A2 (fr) Procede pour conserver partiellement l'ordre des paquets dans une commutation de paquets sans connexion avec routage alternatif
DE60036493T2 (de) Datenflusssteuerung
DE69631744T2 (de) Anlage und Verfahren zur Bandbreitenverwaltung in Netzwerken mit mehreren Diensten
EP1428362A2 (fr) Reseau de communication sans connexions et oriente paquets
EP1374627B1 (fr) Procede et systeme permettant une gestion efficace des ressources dans des reseaux mpls
DE60203539T2 (de) Mehrfach-domain-zugriffsregelung von datenflüssen in assoziation mit dienstqualitätskriterien
EP1319287B1 (fr) Procede pour etablir des connexions a qualite de service garanti pour un reseau de communication comportant un gestionnaire de ressources
EP1530852B1 (fr) Compartiments de repartition pour une repartition du trafic efficace et sure en cas de defaillance dans un reseau a commutation de paquets
DE69734013T2 (de) Dynamische verkehrskonditionierung
DE602004012412T2 (de) Verfahren und System zur Verwaltung eines Datenburst-Durchsatzes von einem optischen Netzwerk mit Burstschaltung

Legal Events

Date Code Title Description
PUAI Public reference made under article 153(3) epc to a published international application that has entered the european phase

Free format text: ORIGINAL CODE: 0009012

17P Request for examination filed

Effective date: 20040315

AK Designated contracting states

Kind code of ref document: A2

Designated state(s): AT BE BG CH CY CZ DE DK EE ES FI FR GB GR IE IT LI LU MC NL PT SE SK TR

AX Request for extension of the european patent

Extension state: AL LT LV MK RO SI

RAP1 Party data changed (applicant data changed or rights of an application transferred)

Owner name: NOKIA SIEMENS NETWORKS GMBH & CO. KG

RAP3 Party data changed (applicant data changed or rights of an application transferred)

Owner name: NOKIA SIEMENS NETWORKS S.P.A.

17Q First examination report despatched

Effective date: 20071109

RAP3 Party data changed (applicant data changed or rights of an application transferred)

Owner name: NOKIA SIEMENS NETWORKS GMBH & CO. KG

STAA Information on the status of an ep patent application or granted ep patent

Free format text: STATUS: THE APPLICATION IS DEEMED TO BE WITHDRAWN

18D Application deemed to be withdrawn

Effective date: 20080320