Throughput Performance Evaluation of Video/Voice Traffic in IPv4/IPv6 Networks

Abstract

This paper presents a study of throughput performance of voice and video traffic based on simulative and analytical methods in IPv4/IPv6 networks. This research aims to find out what Internet protocol performs better in terms of throughput under congested circumstances in IPv4/IPv6 networks. In doing so three different network loads in both scenarios are considered. In the context of network load, the importance of varying network load is realized while configuring and simulating the network models. For instance, a medium network load, high network load then a worst possible network load are considered to understand the impact on the performance of throughput in IPv4/IPv6 networks. The network topology scenarios are partially meshed on the implication with a small ISP domain as this is an ideal choice of IP domain corresponded to a realistic network topology. Two network models are defined which allow us to compare the obtained results. In addition, IPv4 network model is used and extended in terms of configuring IPv6 network model as. The simulation has been carried out using Optimized Network Engineering Tool (OPNET). This paper shows that analytical and simulative approaches produce same results in terms of throughput performance for video/voice traffic. From Internet Protocol performance perspective, IPv6 experiences more throughput than IPv4.

References

• S. Deering and R. Hinden, “Internet Protocol, Version 6 (IPv6) Specification,” RFC 2460 (Draft Standard), Internet Engineering Task Force, Dec. 1998, updated by RFCs 5095, 5722, 5871. [Online]. Available: http://¬www.ietf.org/-rfc/¬rfc2460.txt
• A. Liakopoulos, D. Kalogeras, V. Maglaris, D. Primpas, and C. Bouras, “QoS experiences in native IPv6 networks,” International Journal of Network Management, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 119–137, 2009.
• Y. Wang, S. Ye, and X. Li, “Understanding Current IPv6 Performance: A Measurement Study,” in 10th IEEE Symposium on Computer Communications,Jun. 2005.
• X. Zhou, R. E. Kooij, H. Uijterwaal, and P. van Mieghem, “Estimation of Perceived Quality of Service for Applications on IPv6 Networks,” in ACM PM2HW2N’06, Oct. 2006.
• D. P. Pezaros, D. Hutchison, F. J. Garcia, R. D. Gardner, and J. S.Sventek, “Service Quality Measurements for IPv6 Inter-networks,” in 12th IEEE IWQoS, Jun. 2004.
• T.-Y. Wu, H.-C. Chao, T.-G. Tsuei, and Y.-F. Li, “A Measurement Study of Network Efficiency for TWAREN IPv6 Backbone,” International Journal of Network Management, vol. 15, no. 6, pp. 411–419, Nov. 2005.
• K. Cho, M. Luckie, and B. Huffaker, “Identifying IPv6 Network Problems in the Dual-Stack World,” in ACM SigComm Network Troubleshooting Workshop, Sep. 2004.
• S. Zeadally and L. Raicu, “Evaluating IPv6 on Windows and Solaris,” IEEE Internet Comput., vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 51–57, May/Jun. 2003.
• W. Matthews. (2000, Oct.) IPv6 Performance and Reliability.[Online]. Available:http://www.slac.stanford.edu/grp/scs/net/talk/ipv6-oct00/IPv6-2000files/v3document.htm
• Y. Law, M. Lai, W. Tan and W. Lau, “Empirical Performance of IPv6 vs. IPv4 under a Dual-Stack Environment”, in Proceeding of IEEE International Conference of Communication, 2008, pp. 5924-5929.
• C. Bouras, A. Gkamas, D. Primpas, and K. Stamos, “Quality of Service aspects in an IPv6 domain,” in 2004 International Symposium on Performance Evaluation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems (SPECTSf04), San Jose, California, USA, 2004, pp. 238–245.
• R. Mondragon, A. Moore, J. Pitts, and J. Schormans, “Analysis, simulation and measurement in large-scale packet networks,” Communications, IET, vol. 3, no. 6, pp. 887–905, 2009.
• P. Farrington, H. Nembhard, D. Sturrock, G. Evans, and X. Chang, “NETWORK SIMULATIONS WITH OPNET,” 2009.
• OPNET. OPNET Modeler 14.0. [Online]. Available: http://-www.opnet.com/¬solutions/¬network_rd/¬modeler.html
• R. Sargent, “Verification and validation of simulation models,” in Proceedings of the 37th conference on Winter simulation. Winter Simulation Conference, 2005, pp. 130–143.
• A. Law, “Statistical analysis of simulation output data: the practical state of the art,” in Simulation Conference, 2007 Winter. IEEE, 2008, pp. 77–83.
• OPNET, Modeler Release, 14th ed. [Online]. Available: http://www.opnet.com/solutions/network_rd/modeler.html
• K. Salah, P. Calyam, and M. Buhari, “Assessing readiness of IP networks to support desktop videoconferencing using OPNET,” Journal of Network and Computer Applications, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 921–943, 2008.
• J. Moy, “OSPF Version 2,” RFC 2328 (Standard), Internet Engineering Task Force, Apr. 1998, updated by RFC 5709. [Online]. Available: http://¬www.ietf.org/¬rfc/¬rfc2328.txt
• R. Coltun, D. Ferguson, J. Moy, and A. Lindem, “OSPF for IPv6,” RFC 5340 (Proposed Standard), Internet Engineering Task Force, Jul. 2008. [Online]. Available: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5340.txt
• P. Chimento and J. Ishac, “Defining Network Capacity,” RFC 5136 (Informational), Internet Engineering Task Force, Feb. 2008. [Online]. Available: http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc5136.txt
• K. Salah, P. Calyam, and M. Buhari, “Assessing readiness of IP networks to support desktop videoconferencing using OPNET,” Journal of Network and Computer Applications, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 921–943, 2008.
• O. Balci, “Principles and techniques of simulation validation, verification, and testing,” in Simulation Conference Proceedings, 1995. Winter. IEEE, 2002, pp. 147–154.
• K. Pawlikowski, H. Jeong, J. Lee et al., “On credibility of simulation studies of telecommunication networks,” IEEE Communications Magazine, vol. 40, no. 1, pp. 132–139, 2002.
• A. Law, W. Kelton, and W. Kelton, Simulation modeling and analysis. McGraw-Hill New York, 1991, vol. 2.

Index Terms

Keywords