Siemens-LUMS Collaboration

Project on GELS EvaluationCT IT 2 (Siemens)NC Lab (LUMS)

Sept 2005– Identification of research

areas and key people at Siemens and LUMS

Jan 2006Identification of application area of mutual interest

Feb 2006 – Jan 2007– Project span and active

collaboration

June 2006– Documentation,

packaging of deliverables, research reports

Evaluation of GELS ArchitectureEvaluation of GELS ArchitectureHistory

Areas: MPLS and GMPLS

CT IT 2 NC Lab

GMPLS Control for Ethernet(GELS)

Problem definitionSimulation environment

Software available onlinePublication at Globecom 2007

Evaluation of GELS ArchitectureEvaluation of GELS ArchitecturePeople

Dr. Herbertus Dewitz (Liaison role)

Dr. Johannes Riedl (Technical role)

Mr. Martin Nathensen (Technical role)

Mr. Kulkarni (Technical role)

Siemens

LUMS

Dr. Khurram Afridi (Liaison and advisory role)

Dr. Zartash Afzal Uzmi (Technical and Supervisory role)

Fahad Rafique Dogar (Research Associate)

Muhammad Saqib Ilyas (Ph.D. Candidate at LUMS)

Fawaz Saleem Bokhari (Student researcher)

Atif Nazir (Student researcher)

Question– Is it feasible and/or better to use newly proposed GELS

architecture instead of traditional (STP) solution?

Evaluation of GELS ArchitectureEvaluation of GELS ArchitectureProblem Definition

Given– A network of nodes and

communication links

ProblemOptimally place traffic on the given network

Options(1) use 25+ years old STP in the network(2) use a newly proposedGELS architecture

Evaluation of GELS ArchitectureEvaluation of GELS ArchitectureApproach for Evaluation of GELS

MethodologyDevelop software tools for:(1) simulating GELS architecture(2) simulating traditional solution

Consider a well known network (e.g., European COST266)

Compare old and new solutions (STP vs. GELS)

Network behaves normally Portion of Network fails

Which solution places more traffic on the network?

Which solution recovers faster form the failure?

Compare resultsSTP vs. GELS

Evaluation of GELS ArchitectureEvaluation of GELS ArchitectureResults: How much traffic can be placed?

A famous European network (COST266)

Evaluation of GELS ArchitectureEvaluation of GELS ArchitectureResults: Using old solution (STP)

Black links indicate no traffic!

Evaluation of GELS ArchitectureEvaluation of GELS ArchitectureResults: Using new solution (GELS)

There are no black links!

Evaluation of GELS ArchitectureEvaluation of GELS ArchitectureComparative Performance

Comparison Graph: Taken from IEEE Globecom 2007 paper

Evaluation of GELS ArchitectureEvaluation of GELS ArchitectureContributions and Deliverables

Monthly feedback and setting research direction in line with the interest of Siemens

Suggestion of networks that are of practical interest to Siemens

Suggestion of network traffic parameters to conduct the simulations

Siemens

LUMS

Development of simulation testbed and software tools

Development of new algorithms for traffic placement

Definition of criteria for comparing old and new solutions for placing traffic on the network

Installation and support documentation

Research report (to appear at IEEE Globecom 2007)

Evaluation of GELS ArchitectureEvaluation of GELS ArchitectureList of Deliverables

All software available for download (with instructions)

Evaluation of GELS ArchitectureEvaluation of GELS ArchitectureFuture work and Collaboration

Mechanisms for replacing the traditional STP with the new GELS-based solution

GELS

WirelessModules

Product of WM BU based in Berlin

Transition Issue

Areas of collaboration:Efficient power control

New applications based on wireless modules

Thank You

Problem– Develop framework to

accommodate maximum restorable traffic in an MPLS ISP network

Approach― Allow maximum sharing of

backup paths― Identify optimal information to

be propagated― Identify optimal set of nodes to

compute backup paths

Solution– A restoration routing scheme

able to accommodate 10% more traffic over an MPLS network compared to best known methodologies

Future Directions– Create MPLS Traffic Engineering test

bed with 26 nodes for experimentation

Primary Path

Backup Path

Single Failure Assumption allows these backup paths to share bandwidth

Funded by CISCO

Published in ICC ’05 and ICC ‘07

Dr. Zartash A Uzmi

S 1 2 3 D

Restoration Routing in MPLS NetworksRestoration Routing in MPLS NetworksRestoration Routing in MPLS Networks

Error Resilience of Multimedia InformationError Resilience of Multimedia Information

Observation– Developing countries are offering

the fastest growth in mobile technology

– Largest WiMax deployment is being done in Pakistan (Motorola/Wateen)

Research Strategy– Address the networking issues for

the 4th generation multi-hop broadband wireless networks

– Emphasize the components in the 802.16J architecture

– Work with the industry to translate the research into technology

Icebreaking with 802.16J– Relay functionality – Access network frequency

management– Admission control– Local and network mobility

management– QoS enhancements via relays– Broadband multimedia services

Future Plan– Address ALL relevant research areas– Physical Layer (Collaborative MIMO and

OFDMA, ST diversity, Cognitive radio)– RF Hardware (High efficiency linear power

amps, tunable receivers, antenna arrays)– MAC (opportunistic scheduling with fairness)– Networking (Mobility management, handoff

and roaming, Ambient networking)– Services (VoIP, Mobile TV, High Res Games)

Various faculty members

Wireless Network Research Initiative

User Data Rate Distribution(DL,10MHz, FDD,10 user/secotr)

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Percentile (%)

Da

ta T

hro

ug

hp

ut

(Mb

ps

)

Tri-Sector Only 2 Relay/Sector

Error Resilience of Multimedia InformationError Resilience of Multimedia InformationRSTP vs. GELS: Recovery time