@techreport{GrigorjewSchumannDiederichetal.2023, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Grigorjew, Alexej and Schumann, Lukas Kilian and Diederich, Philip and Hoßfeld, Tobias and Kellerer, Wolfgang}, title = {Understanding the Performance of Different Packet Reception and Timestamping Methods in Linux}, series = {KuVS Fachgespr{\"a}ch - W{\"u}rzburg Workshop on Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Next-Generation Communication Networks 2023 (WueWoWAS'23)}, journal = {KuVS Fachgespr{\"a}ch - W{\"u}rzburg Workshop on Modeling, Analysis and Simulation of Next-Generation Communication Networks 2023 (WueWoWAS'23)}, doi = {10.25972/OPUS-32206}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-322064}, pages = {5}, year = {2023}, abstract = {This document briefly presents some renowned packet reception techniques for network packets in Linux systems. Further, it compares their performance when measuring packet timestamps with respect to throughput and accuracy. Both software and hardware timestamps are compared, and various parameters are examined, including frame size, link speed, network interface card, and CPU load. The results indicate that hardware timestamping offers significantly better accuracy with no downsides, and that packet reception techniques that avoid system calls offer superior measurement throughput.}, language = {en} } @techreport{BlenkKellererHossfeld2020, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Blenk, Andreas and Kellerer, Wolfgang and Hoßfeld, Tobias}, title = {Technical Report on DFG Project SDN-App: SDN-enabled Application-aware Network Control Architectures and their Performance Assessment}, doi = {10.25972/OPUS-20755}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-207558}, year = {2020}, abstract = {The DFG project "SDN-enabled Application-aware Network Control Architectures and their Performance Assessment" (DFG SDN-App) focused in phase 1 (Jan 2017 - Dec 2019) on software defined networking (SDN). Being a fundamental paradigm shift, SDN enables a remote control of networking devices made by different vendors from a logically centralized controller. In principle, this enables a more dynamic and flexible management of network resources compared to the traditional legacy networks. Phase 1 focused on multimedia applications and their users' Quality of Experience (QoE). This documents reports the achievements of the first phase (Jan 2017 - Dec 2019), which is jointly carried out by the Technical University of Munich, Technical University of Berlin, and University of W{\"u}rzburg. The project started at the institutions in Munich and W{\"u}rzburg in January 2017 and lasted until December 2019. In Phase 1, the project targeted the development of fundamental control mechanisms for network-aware application control and application-aware network control in Software Defined Networks (SDN) so to enhance the user perceived quality (QoE). The idea is to leverage the QoE from multiple applications as control input parameter for application-and network control mechanisms. These mechanisms are implemented by an Application Control Plane (ACP) and a Network Control Plane (NCP). In order to obtain a global view of the current system state, applications and network parameters are monitored and communicated to the respective control plane interface. Network and application information and their demands are exchanged between the control planes so to derive appropriate control actions. To this end, a methodology is developed to assess the application performance and in particular the QoE. This requires an appropriate QoE modeling of the applications considered in the project as well as metrics like QoE fairness to be utilized within QoE management. In summary, the application-network interaction can improve the QoE for multi-application scenarios. This is ensured by utilizing information from the application layer, which are mapped by appropriate QoS-QoE models to QoE within a network control plane. On the other hand, network information is monitored and communicated to the application control plane. Network and application information and their demands are exchanged between the control planes so to derive appropriate control actions.}, subject = {Software-defined networking}, language = {en} } @techreport{GrigorjewDiederichHossfeldetal.2022, type = {Working Paper}, author = {Grigorjew, Alexej and Diederich, Philip and Hoßfeld, Tobias and Kellerer, Wolfgang}, title = {Affordable Measurement Setups for Networking Device Latency with Sub-Microsecond Accuracy}, series = {W{\"u}rzburg Workshop on Next-Generation Communication Networks (WueWoWas'22)}, journal = {W{\"u}rzburg Workshop on Next-Generation Communication Networks (WueWoWas'22)}, doi = {10.25972/OPUS-28075}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-280751}, pages = {5}, year = {2022}, abstract = {This document presents a networking latency measurement setup that focuses on affordability and universal applicability, and can provide sub-microsecond accuracy. It explains the prerequisites, hardware choices, and considerations to respect during measurement. In addition, it discusses the necessity for exhaustive latency measurements when dealing with high availability and low latency requirements. Preliminary results show that the accuracy is within ±0.02 μs when used with the Intel I350-T2 network adapter.}, subject = {Datennetz}, language = {en} } @article{HossfeldHeegaardKellerer2023, author = {Hossfeld, Tobias and Heegaard, Poul E. and Kellerer, Wolfgang}, title = {Comparing the scalability of communication networks and systems}, series = {IEEE Access}, volume = {11}, journal = {IEEE Access}, doi = {10.1109/ACCESS.2023.3314201}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-349403}, pages = {101474-101497}, year = {2023}, abstract = {Scalability is often mentioned in literature, but a stringent definition is missing. In particular, there is no general scalability assessment which clearly indicates whether a system scales or not or whether a system scales better than another. The key contribution of this article is the definition of a scalability index (SI) which quantifies if a system scales in comparison to another system, a hypothetical system, e.g., linear system, or the theoretically optimal system. The suggested SI generalizes different metrics from literature, which are specialized cases of our SI. The primary target of our scalability framework is, however, benchmarking of two systems, which does not require any reference system. The SI is demonstrated and evaluated for different use cases, that are (1) the performance of an IoT load balancer depending on the system load, (2) the availability of a communication system depending on the size and structure of the network, (3) scalability comparison of different location selection mechanisms in fog computing with respect to delays and energy consumption; (4) comparison of time-sensitive networking (TSN) mechanisms in terms of efficiency and utilization. Finally, we discuss how to use and how not to use the SI and give recommendations and guidelines in practice. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first work which provides a general SI for the comparison and benchmarking of systems, which is the primary target of our scalability analysis.}, language = {en} }