Thread Links Date Links
Thread Prev Thread Next Thread Index Date Prev Date Next Date Index

RE: [EFM] Minutes of P2MP Optics conference 22nd Aug 20002




Roy,
  Could you please describe your experiment at little bit more in detail? The frame size will not depend on the scheduling at the ONT, the number of ONU's and the total bandwidth. Ain't that correct? If there is a round-robin scheduling (or any other one scheduling algorithm selected) and the total bandwidth fixed (physical determination) and the the number of ONU's are fixed then the frame size will be fixed. Right ?

Thanks
SG

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 8/23/2002 at 5:39 PM Roy Bynum wrote:

>Kent,
>
>The work that I did with video over GbE indicated that the frames were 
>severely bi-polar.  Blocks of very large frames that was dependant on the 
>resolution and compression of the video codec with very small frames 
>interspaced between them.  The amount of bandwidth is very dependant on
>the 
>compression ration and the resolution as well as the refresh rate.  The 
>amount of buffering in the codec devices also played a major role in the 
>maximum bandwidth peak that the data frames required.
>
>Thank you,
>Roy Bynum
>
>At 03:22 PM 8/23/2002 -0700, Mccammon, Kent G. wrote:
>
>>Glen,
>>Referring to your comment about frame size distribution from actual
>traffic.
>>
>> > The size of unused slot remainder depends on frame size
>> > distribution. This distribution for today's traffic is known
>> > and there exist formula to calculate this unused remainder
>> > (for the case when assigned slot size has no correlation to
>> > the frame sizes).
>>
>>Does anyone in the group have a traffic sample from a network transporting
>>digital video streams to give frame size distribution? For example, a
>>traffic sample for digital video over fiber to a VDSL ONU to serve several
>>hundred VDSL lines to a residential gateway.  That scenario may be a good
>>one to look at for traffic on a residential GigaPON connected to multiple
>>VDSL ONU locations with data and switched digital video content.
>>
>>-Kent
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: Glen Kramer [mailto:gkramer@xxxxxxxxxxx]
>> > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2002 9:44 AM
>> > To: Thomas.Murphy@infineon.com; stds-802-3-efm@ieee.org
>> > Subject: RE: [EFM] Minutes of P2MP Optics conference 22nd Aug 20002
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Tom,
>> >
>> > This is to address action item #2 from the minutes.
>> >
>> > 2. Efficiency model based on guard bands and traffic type -
>> > P2MP group?
>> >
>> >
>> > There are 3 types of overhead (or bandwidth loss):
>> >
>> > 1. Cycle overhead. This is overhead used by guard bands
>> > (including CDR). It is measured as a number of guard bands in
>> > one cycle. This number at least equal to the number of ONUs,
>> > but may be even larger if we grant per LLID and there are
>> > multiple LLIDs per ONU.
>> >
>> > 2. Slot overhead.  This overhead arises when granted slot
>> > does not take into account frame delineation in a buffer.
>> > Since frames cannot be fragmented, a frame that doesn't fit
>> > in the remainder of a slot will be deferred to next slot (in
>> > next cycle), leaving current slot underutilized.
>> >
>> > The size of unused slot remainder depends on frame size
>> > distribution. This distribution for today's traffic is known
>> > and there exist formula to calculate this unused remainder
>> > (for the case when assigned slot size has no correlation to
>> > the frame sizes).
>> >
>> > Few protocol proposals consider how to eliminate unused slot
>> > remainder completely, but it looks like it will require
>> > changes to the frame format.  P2MP group is still debating about it.
>> >
>> > 3. Frame overhead.  That includes IFG and headers. Nothing we
>> > can do about it.
>> >
>> > Glen
>> >
>> > > -----Original Message-----
>> > > From: owner-stds-802-3-efm@majordomo.ieee.org
>> > [mailto:owner-stds-802-3-
>> > > efm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Thomas.Murphy@xxxxxxxxxxxx
>> > > Sent: Friday, August 23, 2002 1:57 AM
>> > > To: stds-802-3-efm@ieee.org
>> > > Subject: [EFM] Minutes of P2MP Optics conference 22nd Aug 20002
>> > >
>> > > Hello All,
>> > >
>> > > First off I apologise for sending this mail to the
>> > > EFM reflector, however, a number of issues arose which
>> > > are relevant for other groups.
>> > >
>> > > The next phone conference is planned for next Thursday
>> > > at the old time of 11:00 Eastern
>> > >
>> > > Regards
>> > >
>> > > Tom
>> > >
>> >
>> >