1. Current Situation
Major progress has been made to propose networks with the facility to ensure the QoS for the real time data. As there are problem like, end-to-end delay and delay jitter are typically introduces due to random queueing in the network routers. During the current years real time applications for instance, video streaming, interactive games and voice over IP have turn out to be increasingly well-liked among computer users. These applications are usually delay responsive and typically requires superior treatments in order to gratify a needed level of Quality of Services (QoS) limits.
Due to its explosion into business, there is better as well as additional imperative need for ISPs (Internet Service Providers) industry to be capable to offer and as well maintain QoS. As far as ATM is concerned it gives a enriched set of QoS means with a extensive range of service categories. However, QoS descriptor which presents a very well control over the traffic parameters demanded and managed. In addition, most of the ISPs are already using ATM in their backend networks. But there are certain problems which I will further discuss in interim report. The aim of this dissertation is to make a comparison and to find out which network is better regarding QoS mechanisms to facilitate the proposed for IP.
Battaglia and Kiilat However, MPLS is mainly known as Multiprotocol Label switching as well as it is fundamentally a scheme that work outs to forward packets professionally and consequently promptly. With the passage of time, to improve the quality of MPLS a header is fully dedicated to work between the layer2 and layer3 header is formulated. MPLS competent routers immediately look at this header in making to forward the decision. MPLS is able to support domains, hierarchical routing and be capable to be used for tunneling purpose. Domain limitations are described by limits of a router which inserts the suitable label onto a stack, which is eliminated with the help of boundary router. A route can be particularly specified by a router. During tunneling the access of Label Switched Router describes the whole Label Switched Path all the way through the tunnel.
Gnauck IP and ATM are considered as complimentary somehow competitive. IP has increased prevalent acceptance and is here to stay as a future technology. On the other hand, its unsophisticated structural design that allowed in achieving its incontrovertible point is the major flaws that there are research groups are trying to address this issue. As a matter of fact, QoS is one such significant weakness of IP. Nonetheless, ATM boasts of a structural design which has comparatively complicated techniques of providing QoS. Conversely, another important fact is cost, inertia and difficulty, ATM did not accomplish its touted ethereal position.
Chris At the same time as ATM claims to provide QoS assurances, it yet cannot do anything above layer 2. This portrays that every layer 3 flows as a result, have been combined jointly cannot be distinguished by ATM, and as a result they all end up challenging each other and an additional for the similar resources. Therefore, there is desirable a way to put into practice that helps in controlling traffic control, as well as this is most excellently ended in the layer
Myungsik QoS enormously in the Internet is issue that has been fairly getting some vital concentration from the networking community as well companies. The most well-liked ones heading for reliability at the present are DiffServ and InterServ which assures to give QoS, perhaps end-to-end in IP. Despite the fact that, engaging in the attempt to even out the technical requirements are in a state of fluctuation and developing. Alternatively, of networking field ATM is setting up for itself a position, in the ISP backbones in addition to these regions the network engineers are troubled with the interoperability of IP over ATM. Whereas, this has been complete pretty much done, the confronts recline in making successful use of the intrinsic potential of QoS mechanisms in ATM in a condition as soon as running IP on top. This type of measures measures, exclusively Intserv and DiffServ and MPLS-DiffServ regarding ATM must be well thought-out beside with the help of interoperation process of signaling protocol RSVP. Problems that have been addressed and topen issues are discussed in this literature review.
2. Problem Areas
IP out ATM is now extensively deployed and successfully solving the problem of internet working, interoperability and help in reducing end-to-end delay problem. Now, I am trying to sort out all the issues and problems currently in QoS in IP over ATM and IP over MPLS Networks. For instance,
How to reduce end-to-end delays?
How to effectively improve the multimedia traffics?
To investigate which one is better approach QOS in IP over ATM and IP over MPLS networks?
To investigate the future secure network?
Comparison between QOS in IP over ATM and IP over MPLS networks?
Which technique is better for multimedia traffic?
In real situations in the field area there are diverse obstacles to facilitate the effect of transmission of signal. I am also studying about how to test the impact of obstacles in OPNET.
3. Key Work during the Next Period
I will complete my first three objectives before to submit interim report. I will also design a MANET scenario to test the performance of routing protocols when mobility increase and decrease.
- To find out major differences between QOS in IP over ATM and IP over MPLS networks
- Preliminary background of major problems in both networks
- Theoretical analysis, contrast and categorization of the techniques used by both networks
As a result, to find out most excellent simulation techniques and principles involved in carrying out modelling.
To find out which network is better.
To consider simulation tools used in testing phase.