Static vs. adaptive feedback congestion controller for ATM networks
Abstract
One of the fundamental challenges facing broadband information transport is the determination of congestion control strategies to support multiple classes of traffic in the asynchronous transfer mode (ATM) based networks. Monitoring the buffer status (queue length) is the most commonly used mechanism to detect congestion in ATM networks. In a static feedback controller approach, feedback signals are generated when the queue length of the buffer exceeds a threshold value. However, defining the threshold of the buffer as a congestion point is not straightforward and the value to which source rates must be regulated is not so clear, either. We propose an explicit congestion notification mechanism for ATM networks using artificial neural networks (ANNs) to estimate the amount by which sources need to reduce their transmission rates. Three models using the ANNs are presented and the obtained results are compared. The results of a simulation study suggest that our mechanisms provide simple and effective traffic management for ATM networks. Cell loss due to congestion shows a 2-10 times improvement compared with the static approach, while transmission delay introduced by our ANN controller is also smaller than in the static approach in most cases.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
The first ML-based approaches for congestion control were proposed in the context of ATM networks.
“the first ML-based approaches for congestion control were proposed in the context of asynchronous t ransfer mode (ATM) networks [175, 264, 284, 437].”
From A comprehensive survey on machine learning for networking: Evolution, applications and research opportunities (2018) · cites this paper as [284]
Cites
Equivalent capacity and its application to bandwidth allocation in high-speed networks
Guérin, R. A., Ahmadi, H., & Naghshineh, M. (1991) · IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications · doi:10.1109/49.103545 · Cited by 1,315 · see citing works
Neural networks for routing communication traffic
Rauch, H. E., & Winarske, T. (1988) · IEEE Control Systems Magazine · doi:10.1109/37.1870 · Cited by 175 · see citing works
ATM communications network control by neural networks
Hiramatsu, A. (1990) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks · doi:10.1109/72.80211 · Cited by 152 · see citing works
Neural network architecture for crossbar switch control
Troudet, T., & Walters, S. M. (1991) · IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems · doi:10.1109/31.101302 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Backward explicit congestion notification for ATM local area networks
Newman, P. (2002) · IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference (GLOBECOM) · doi:10.1109/glocom.1993.318176 · Cited by 79 · see citing works
Neural Networks in Telecommunications
Yuhas, B. P., & Ansari, N. (1994) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-1-4615-2734-3 · Cited by 63 · see citing works
A rate-based feedback traffic controller for ATM networks
Atai, A., & Hui, J. (2002) · International Conference on Communications · doi:10.1109/icc.1994.368760 · Cited by 20 · see citing works
A LOW PASS FILTER FOR INCIDENT DETECTION
Stephanedes, Y. J., & Chassiakos, A. P. (1991) · Applications of Advanced Technologies in Transportation Engineering · Cited by 15 · see citing works
A neural network approach to set up the Benes switch
Hakim, N., & Meadows, H. E. (2002) · IEEE Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM) · doi:10.1109/infcom.1990.91274 · Cited by 12 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Boutaba, R., Salahuddin, M. A., Limam, N., Ayoubi, S., Shahriar, N., Estrada-Solano, F., & Caicedo, O. M. (2018) · Journal of Internet Services and Applications · doi:10.1186/s13174-018-0087-2 · Cited by 1,036 · see citing works
- Authors
- Liu, Y.-C., & Douligeris, C.
- Affiliations
- University of Miami (US)
- ORCID
- Douligeris, C.
- Venue
- Proceedings of GLOBECOM '95
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2002-11-19
- Volume
- 1
- Pages
- 291-295
- ISSN
- 1930-529X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2137915545
- Cited by
- 15
- References
- 9
- Citations by year
- 2022: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2015: 1
- FWCI
- 0.74
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Globecom (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Traffic and Congestion Control
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Traffic control and management
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Software-Defined Networks and 5G
- Keywords
- congestion control, ATM networks, adaptive feedback control, static feedback control, artificial neural networks, Explicit Congestion Notification, queue length threshold, traffic management, cell loss, transmission delay
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
