SAI Intelligent Systems Conference 2016
September 21-22, 2016 | London, UK
A Forecasting Model for Data Center Bandwidth
Utilization
Samar Raza Talpur
School of Computer Science
University College Dublin
Belfield Dublin, Ireland
Email: samar.talpur@ucdconnect.ie
Abstract—Bandwidth optimization and its efficient utilization
is more challenging in operating data centers. Our model can
assist for proper usage of resource utilization and accommodate
large scale of bursty data. In this paper we propose forecast
model for Data Center Bandwidth Utilization system; a forecast
model for data centers to predict and estimate proper bandwidth
utilization in real-world situations. Based on self-learning proce-
dures, the proposed forecasting model will optimize the traffic
and predict bandwidth more efficiently. Our approach is based
on Time Series and Vector Autoregression (VAR-Model) models,
it optimizes the bandwidth traffic detecting and diagnosing the
future based on historical data.
Keywords—Bandwidth Utilization, Network Forecasting, Time
Series, ARIMA Models, Exponential Smoothing, VAR Model.
I. I NTRODUCTION
While Data Centers are growing in use and popularity,
the business communities are also more concerned about
speed, reliability and better performance of networks. A typical
Data Center uses the shared network resources. The network
performance is affected when the bandwidth consumption
increases. When the demand is above a certain limit of its total
capacity, the whole network becomes unstable. Network band-
width importance is very valuable when it comes to business
use, especially for Business-to-Business (B2B) community, as
they heavily rely on healthier internet connectivity; it is a
prerequisite for all users that are connected with each other and
need a good speed level of data exchange. Certainly they need
fast internet and higher bandwidth and more importantly when
using data center resources involving significant data volume.
Global network traffic evolved with an impressive usage, in
relation to the foregoing observations of the last two decades.
In 1992 the total Internet traffic per day was 100 GB, soon
after one decade later in 2002 it jumped at 100 GB per second,
even as in 2014 it arrived at 16,144 GB per second, whereas
the predication for 2019 is expected to be more than 51,974
GB per second [21], [5], [29]. Motivated by system model-
ing, Network Bandwidth Predictor (NBP) [7] used a neural-
network based approach to predict the bandwidth usage and
network performance. NBP combined with NWS (Network
Weather Service) is developed for observing subsystems and
measuring the network behavior. GLMM [15] presented for
high speed in data network analysis, a new predictive model
which analyzes the traffic patterns and conditions of several
networks. The simulation based study claims high accuracy
in MSPE (Mean Squared Predication Error). Moussas [28]
978-1-5090-1121-6/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE
Prof. Tahar Kechadi
School of Computer Science
University College Dublin
Belfield Dublin, Ireland
Email: tahar.kechadi@ucd.ie
also used ARIMA model for traffic monitoring to predict the
future traffic utilization, by using four different components
(a) Campus networks (b) dialup connections (c) Local Area
Network and (d) backbone. Network Bandwidth Utilization
Forecast Model on High Bandwidth Network [38] uses time se-
ries model and claims efficient resources of network utilization.
The results showed that it can reduce computational time by
83.2% compared to other traditional approaches. This model
can help scheduling data movements on high bandwidth net-
works. However, if the planning about network usage is known
in advance, the performance can be improved significantly. The
challenge, here is how to build a forecast model for real-world
traffic in data centers. This will help not only improving the
performance of both data centers and the networks but also
help managing, planning and upgrading both the network and
data center resources. Considering all the above mentioned
models neither are specifically designed for data centers nor
they all have real network traffic of data centers. Our model is
entirely different and exclusively designed for data centers,
we used absolute genuine traffic to experiment with and
apply the same for monitoring and prediction. In order to
improve traffic accuracy in data centers, we developed Data
Center Bandwidth Utilization forecasting model. Statistical
models observed high volume of real traffic and can predict
accurately network performance which can be helpful for a
good network administrator. With the growth of data centers,
the big number of data center service providers have thousands
of servers and other equipment installed, doubling all these
equipment every 18 months and proving the prediction of
Moore’s law [26]. Once we look at the running cost, millions of
dollars were spent on diversified hardware, complex workload
and thousands of various applications. Despite of all the
conventional data centers neither provide proper access for
public trace nor real time monitoring system for researchers.
Linear regression, using Granger causality and VAR model
(Eviews tools) forecasting is also nicer option for predicating
the bandwidth utilization [2], [11].
II. M ETHODOLOGY
A. Design of Data Center
Among many data center architectures, we opt for a typical
three-tier architecture [24] which contains layer 2 to 4 devices
such as core routers, aggregation and access switches. The
hierarchies of networks are connected with each other from
higher layers to lower layers. The distribution and aggregation
195 | P a g e
 SAI Intelligent Systems Conference 2016
September 21-22, 2016 | London, UK

layer switches at higher layers are directly connected with the

outside traffic (the Internet), while edge layer switches are
connected with servers and end-user computers.

We also fixed a dedicated database server, which operated

constantly (24 x 7) as a traffic capturing server for collecting
network traffic and network behavior. As shown in figure,
we collected different types of data from both networks i.e.
public and private networks. The secured network, treated as
private network, are connected with firewall via a number
of restricted policies for In-Out traffic. On the other-hand
unrestricted networks bypass the firewall and open for all users,
these networks are public.
Fig. 3: Captured Traffic of 24 Hours

Access Aggregation Core

Switch

Core Router
(Pub-NW)
Core Switch Internet

Firewall

Core Switch

Firewall

Core Router
(Pvt NW)

Traffic
Database
Fig. 4: Captured Traffic of 30 Days
Fig. 1: Standard Topology of Data Center

All generated network traffic of LANs and WANs is

B. Traffic Generation
More than 150 computers are running absolutely (24x7)
to generate diversified traffic within a particular interval of
time. The captured traffic (In-Out) from different LANs and
WANs (public and private) is monitored and stored in database
server. Database server constantly running and storing the
traffic without any interruption and downtime.
divided into different categories of time and intervals i.e;
minutes, hours and days. For example, Figure-2 shows 60
minutes of generated traffic with 30 second interval, and
Figure-3 shows 24 hours generated traffic and captured with
average of 5 minutes’ intervals, while the Figure-4 displays 30
days of traffic captured at time intervals of 60 minutes. The
purpose of this exercise is to demonstrate different granularities
of time slots with standard refresh time of intervals (i.e.
minutes, hours and days) so that selected sample of small and
big units to update the real time traffic and to cope with more
accuracy and better performance. In future we plan to utilize
these data sets to deal with latency and jitter of traffic.

C. Data Collection
The fundamental reason for capturing the real-time traffic is
to monitor the whole network, and fulfill the upcoming demand
of bandwidth and installation of network devices. We captured
the traffic on routers’ ports with the following factors. (Note
that the real-time traffic was taken from June 2014 to June
2015).
However routers can have multiple types of ports and connec-
tors, but we connect fast Ethernet port of routers and collect the
traffic in raw format. So far we clean the data (raw to csv) for
popular format for slicing and visualization, by going through
all the process of data mining and modeling. Subsequently the
Fig. 2: Captured Traffic of 60 Minutes traffic presents in shape with In-Out in kilo bits per second
and Kilobytes per second on initial stage.
978-1-5090-1121-6/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE 196 | P a g e

D. Traffic Observation
During the experiments, we try to monitor the In-Out traffic
on on Router’s port1 (FastEthernet0/0) (Bandwidth in both
KBytes/s and kb/s). All the traffic data is captured and stored
in database server and it is directly connected to a router on
fast Ethernet port. Using Wireshark software tool we captured
all the incoming and outgoing traffic. The traffic was recorded
for various time intervals: minutes, hours and days format from
networks to the Internet. The reasons for capturing diversified
traffic of various variations to obtain more precise results.
III. E XPERIMENTAL R ESULTS
ARIMA(1,0,1): This is the combination of autoregressive
(AR) model and Moving Average (MA) models with integra-
tion of order zero. Let T(In) be considered for In traffic which
measured in kb/s and  can be uses normalisation of data. It
can be jotted down as follows:
T (In)t = µ + αT (In)t−1 + γt−1 + t (1)
Where α, non-zero is the mean or drift component and (t )
is the disturbance term that is normally distributed. The α
and γ are the coefficients of the lag terms T(In) and Errors
respectively.
In the similar fashion, model can be constructed for the
Tout traffic follows:
T (Out)t = µ + αT (Out)t−1 + γt−1 + t (2)
Focusing on various results was an additional motivation to
work with different models, based on multiple sources and
previous data we got the deliverable outcomes. Our productive
outcomes help the analytical results for decision making.
Subsequently endeavoring couple of models and compare the
difference with one another to optimize the process and precise
the network bandwidth. To predict the futuristic movement
the time series (ARIMA) and VAR models were best options
to choose. Heading to summarize different types of data sets
then convert same data into machine readable format the most
common approach EDA (Exploratory Data Analysis) [36] was
used. Analyzing and visual plotting the EDA was better choice
to opt, we plotted both traffic (In & Out) on one graph to
observe the correlation of traffic with each other.
A. Auto-Regressive Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA)
Model
Using time-series analysis, we adopted an Autoregressive
Integrated Moving Average (ARIMA) model to forecast the
network traffic. ARIMA (p, d, q) uses non seasonal data
while ARIMA (P, D, Q)m use seasonal data for generalization.
Integer p, d, q are non-negative integers, where “p” = order of
model, “d” = degree of differencing and “q” = moving average
model. While uppercase (P, D, Q)m represent seasonal ARIMA
models, integer “m” represents amount of periods of individual
seasons. The following are the mathematical equations of
seasonal and non-seasonal of ARIMA for forecasting [18],
[14].
978-1-5090-1121-6/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE
SAI Intelligent Systems Conference 2016
September 21-22, 2016 | London, UK
R-Language has built-in facilities for analyzing time series
data, using ”auto.arima” function and passing multiple argu-
ments easily produce some basic forecasting results. Linear
filtering of time series (X, T, S and et) are major factors,
where X= time series, T=trend, S=seasonal component and
et=reminder components. “ts” function converts numeric vec-
tor in to R, first we convert one variable at a time into time
series object by using ”ts” function. The typical format of “ts”
has four standard object for observations i.e. vector, start, end
and frequency, example given here;
port.1.365.days.T IN.ts < −ts(port.1.365.daysT raf f icI N,
start = c(2014, as.P OSIXlt(”2014 − 05 − 28”)yday),
f requency = 365)plot.ts(port.1.365.days.T IN.ts)
However available filtering analysis used in weeks, months
and quarters i.e. (a=2, a=12, and a=40) respectively [40].
Fig. 5: correlation between In and Out traffic
We can see in above figure a visual representation of the
original data, red lines represent In data and green lines Out
data. As shown in the same figure the quarterly visual repre-
sentations between two variables (In-Out). Logarithm presents
in four equal quarters (July 2014-April 2015), we assume
maximum variation in third quarter jumps much higher, and
hitting the maximum amount of bandwidth. It demonstrates the
rush hour of time when maximum Internet users’ are on-line,
and network requests are much higher than its total capacity.
During that time congestion may occurs and users may face
problems while browsing.
During the time of investigation we had many choices to select
the software tools, after investigation R-language was better
option to decide on. R has more natural and steep learning, ma-
jor reasons (a.) free distribution and widely used for analysis.
Immense on-line support with millions of blogs and lectures
197 | P a g e
 SAI Intelligent Systems Conference 2016
September 21-22, 2016 | London, UK

(b.) however R is not built for professional developers but more the weighted averages.
close to scientists and maintain by scientists, (c.) No need In the similar fashion model can be constructed for T(Out) as
to write larger code, R studio provides better interface, this follows:
environment gives free hand to observe the output lively. If
T (Out)t − T (Out)t−1|t
The visual representations of results are shown as under; t =
T (Out)t−1|t
then

T (Out)t = (lt−1 + θct−1 )(1 + t )

lt = (lt−1 + θct−1 )(1 + αt )

bt = θbt−1 + β(lt−1 + θct−1 )t

ETS(M, N, N): Simple Exponential Method with Multiple

Errors
If
T (In)t − T (In)t−1|t
t =
T (In)t−1|t
then

T (In)t = lt−1 (1 + t )

lt = αT (In)t + (1 − α)lt−1

lt = lt−1 (1 + αt )
Fig. 6: Forecast ARIMA, ETS(M,Ad,N) and ETS(M,N,N)
In the similar fashion model can be constructed for T(Out)
as follows:
B. Exponential Smoothing Functions If
T (Out)t − T (Out)t−1|t
ETS (M, Ad , N ) Exponential Smoothing Damped Trend t =
Method with multiplicative Errors T (Out)t−1|t
then
If T (Out)t = lt−1 (1 + t )
T (In)t − T (In)t−1|t
t =
T (In)t−1|t
lt = αT (Out)t + (1 − α)lt−1
then

T (In)t = (lt−1 + θct−1 )(1 + t )
lt = (lt−1 + θct−1 )(1 + αt )
bt = θbt−1 + β(lt−1 + θct−1 )t
Where α, β and θ are the smoothing parameters and l0 and
b0 are the initial guesses for level and trend components. They
are used to maximize the likelihood. Traditionally, the possi-
ble values of the smoothing parameters have been restricted
between zero and one so that equation can be constrained to
978-1-5090-1121-6/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE
lt = lt−1 (1 + αt )
While using time series in R, ts-package offers Alpha (α),
Beta (β) and gamma ((γ) functions, as HoltWinters generalized
the procedure to compact with trend and seasonal variation.
Given parameters Alpha describes “level, Beta deal with
“trend” and Gamma deal with “seasonal variation”. However
data-set for exponential smoothing functions are described in
above code. [19], [17], [40]
However for Exponential Smoothing function we use the
following equation
F t + 1 = F t + α(At–F t)ORF t + 1 = αAt + (1–α)F t (7)
198 | P a g e
 SAI Intelligent Systems Conference 2016
September 21-22, 2016 | London, UK

The forecast values are converted in the shape of two

models i.e. Exponential smoothing and ARIMA [9], [20]
1. Forecast from ETS (M,Ad,N) ETS=Exponential Trial
Smoothing (Error, Tend, Seasonal) Where M=Multiplicative,
Ad=additive damped, N=None 2. Forecast from ETS(M,N,N)
ETS=Exponential Trial Smoothing (Error, Tend, Seasonal)
Where M=Multiplicative, N=None

The table shows fifteen exponential smoothing methods of

trend components and seasonal components of ARIMA model
using R-language [18].

Trend Component Seasonal Component

N (None) A (Additive) M (Multiplicative)

N (None) N, N N, A N, M
Fig. 8: Results of Vector Autoregression (VAR) (p) Model
A (Additive) A, N A, A A, M

Ad (Additive damped) A d, N A d, A A d, M

M (Multiplicative) M, N M, A M, M

Md (Multiplicative damped) M d, N M d, A M d, M

Fig. 7: Exponential Smoothing Methods

C. Vector Autoregression (VAR) (p) model

However predicting and obtaining the futurist data in my

research study, We used “Vector Autoregression” (VAR) (p) Fig. 9: Residuals Graph
model to predict the In and Out bandwidth traffic (kbps) and
have used the AIC (Akaike information criterion) and LR test
(Likelihood-ratio test) for lag selection criterion. The equations
We have used VAR(1) to predict the bandwidth traffic Out
for Vector Autoregression (VAR) can be represented are as
(kbp/s) the estimated VAR(1) is given by
under:

Xt = c + aXt − 1 + e (8)

Int = c + a1(In)t − 1 + a2(In)t − 2

+a3Out(t) − 1 + a4Out(t) − 2 + e1t Xt = 606.2201 + 0.5148Xt − 1 (9)

Estimated results of the above equation is given in Figure-

Out(t) = c + b1(Out)t − 1 + b2(Out)t − 2
+b3(In)t − 1 + a4(In)t − 2 + e2t
We estimated two equations and results are given in Figure
7 and 8, as results show for equation-1 all coefficients are
statistically significant except the coefficient a3. There are
two coefficients statistically insignificant b2 and b4, it means
Lag 2 of In and Out variables are not significant. However,
we applied granger causality test to check for In and Out
bandwidth traffic affected by the past values of In and Out
bandwidth. The result of Granger causality test is in Figure-8.
Both Hypothesis are rejected so we can conclude that the IN
and Out bandwidth can be predicted by the past values of IN
and Out bandwidth traffics.
978-1-5090-1121-6/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE
7, results shows that
c= 606.2201 with p = 0000 which is highly significant and a =
0.514803 with p-value = 0000 which is also highly significant.
F-value is 256.1357 with p value= 0.0000 which shows that
the our VAR(1) is highly significant. Durbin-Watson stat shows
that there is no problem of auto-correlation (as value is close
to 2). Residuals are very large therefore R2=0.265114 which
is very small. Residuals are shown in the graph (i.e. Figure 4:
Residuals Graph)
This shows that variation in the period more than 400 is
larger as compare to the variation less than 400, which may
cause the small R2 and large standard error.
D. Implementation tools and Specifications
Following programming tools and applications are used for
above research:
199 | P a g e

• Programming Language: R and Java
• Programming Platform: Windows and Unix
• Data Mining: Weka and RapidMiner (Basic version,
free for students)
• Packet analyzer: Wireshark
• Statistical forecasting: R and Eviews (student version)
IV. BACKGROUND AND R ELATED W ORK
Our proposed forecasting model is suitable for proper
resource utilization and also accommodates large scale of
bursty data in data center networks. A number of other
forecasting models are also proposed to measure the network
and bandwidth traffic, most of them used to collect the network
traffic on short term basis (minutes to hours), while some of
other models used for full-term basis (hour to days) [6], [25],
[31], [34]. But our forecasting model used for both from short
time as well as full time to capture the traffic i.e minutes,
hour and days. The reason for both short term and full term to
acquire the detailed traffic traffic and obtain the better results
with more precise outputs.
Numerous researches have presented, examined, and com-
pared for forecasting tool to predict bandwidth and its proper
utilization for example:
Linear regression by using Granger causality and forecast-
ing by using VAR model (by Eviews tools) is also nicer option
for predicating the futurist data. [2], [11], [13].
UANM (Unified architecture for network measurement)
offered an end to end measurement tool for bandwidth es-
timation. Using UANM tool, authors illustrated to achieve
synchronized dimensions and avoid interferences, also increase
the accuracy and reliability of any measurement of bandwidth
from end to end [1].
Traffic-prediction-assisted dynamic bandwidth assignment
for hybrid optical wireless networks proposes performance
based extensive simulation based on extensive simulation and
architectural tool for scheduling. The mechanism propose for
dynamic bandwidth assignment (DBA) and optical network
unit (ONU) which predict the incoming traffic and manage the
network scheduler for better performance on network [27].
Dynamic bandwidth allocation with high utilization
(DBAHU) Algorithm proposes to utilize the unused bandwidth
of a service class. The exemplified procedure uses simple tech-
niques for dynamic bandwidth allocation (SFDBA) algorithm.
Both SFDBA and DBAHU practice a collective accessible
byte counter and a mutual counter for multiple queues of a
service class. Moreover it addresses the problem of un-utilized
bandwidth with service class, and unoccupied bandwidth used
by available byte counter [12].
The SNMP data pattern used in Network Traffic Charac-
teristics of Data Centers in the Wild uses paper, author studied
numerous network patterns [12]. A flexible reservation algo-
rithm for advance network provisioning proposed a framework
for network reservation and claimed to deliver the guaranteed
bandwidth [3].
While An empirical study of the multi-scale predictability
of network traffic illustrated an experimental study to find
978-1-5090-1121-6/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE
SAI Intelligent Systems Conference 2016
September 21-22, 2016 | London, UK
out the errors in forecast on diversified time-scales. Study
tries to present that the forecasting inaccuracies do not reflect
monotonically reduction with ironing on big platform [32].
The estimation of bandwidth can be calculated by sending
the probe packets on network and measured with list of easily
available applications and tools i.e. IGI, Pathload, pathChrip,
Spruce and IGI [16], [22], [33], [35].
In the paper “The Nature of Data center Traffic: Measure-
ments Analysis” [23], the experiment was simulated to create
the traffic pattern intentionally to observe for mining the huge
data-sets for analyzing the performance.
One we see the network architecture of data centers,
the geographically distributed data centers have three layered
connectivity (a) layer-2 and over fiber, (b) Layer-3 with
WAN over dark fiber and (c) storage extension. However the
distributed data centers connectivity expect the compatibility
and fasten support within all network vendors and all tech-
nologies. At present DCI uses layer 2 - 3 Virtual Private
Networks with Multi-Label Switching (VPN-MPLS), Secure
Socket Layer with Virtual Private Networks (SSL-VPN), and
some other bundles of secure protocols. Various other protocols
i.e. IPSEC-VPNs and Vx (virtual private networks and bundle
of virtual s) for secure connections are used.
Multipathing in Data Center Ethernet (DLBMP) is an
alternative solution of STP (Spanning Tree Protocol), DLBMP
propose the solution to overcome the proper bandwidth uti-
lization on data link layer (L2) by using Dijkstra algorithm.
Since STP has problem of unexpected blockage for links and
ports. In DLBMP redundant physical links have deployed to
overcome the failure of physical links, it has more performance
and can handle 300% more bandwidth capacity while compare
with STP. The communication between nodes and traffic are
dynamically adjustable, the load balancing are feasible and
ease to achieve their efficient link with proper bandwidth
utilization [39].
Portland and VL2 [10], [30] uses the architectural model
of Switch-Centric routing structure, which controls the com-
munication by using network switches for routing, the same
anatomy used in three-tier (i. access ii. aggregate iii. core)
and fat-tree. This type of architectures are largely used in
conventional data centers’ physical topology. But the three-
tier topology schemes are very large, complicated and heavy
looking for price and power [4]. The Helios (Hybrid Electrical
and Optical structure) [8] combines pod switches with core
switches, the architecture propose the reductions of switch-
ing elements, cabling, cost, and power consumption. While
cThrough [37] architecture by combining the optical and
electrical technology, the optical segment routing performs one
hop exchange of communication while the electrical segment
works like routing in tree, although optical solution has better
performance in power saving but rarely used in data centers
due to high-priced cost of switches and complex configuration.
V. C ONCLUSION AND F UTURE W ORK
This research paper presented an innovative idea and
approach to support the research communities of networking
especially data center professionals. However it’s challenging
to build forecasting models for real world traffic of Data
200 | P a g e

Centers, more important to make predication of futuristic
traffic when designing, managing and upgrading the complex
network of data centers. In this paper we will focus on
two main objectives; (1) proposing simple and yet scalable
techniques for analysis and forecasting, (2) Implementing and
evaluating these techniques on real-world data centers. Our
next project for research to work on complex protocols used in
data centers; especially take counter measures for the security
of data centers.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
I take this opportunity to express gratitude to all unknown
reviewers for their feedback and make me able to participate
for this conference. This research was supported by Sukkur
Institute of Business Administration, this prestigious institute
allowed me to mentioned the name to acknowledge. I would
like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor Prof. M-
Tahar Kechadi, who is second author of this paper; this study
is nothing with the exception of his continuous support and
motivation. My sincere thanks to my ex-colleague Mr. Fahad
Rahim Qasmi for providing the partial data and excess of data
center.
R EFERENCES
[1] Giuseppe Aceto, Alessio Botta, Antonio Pescapé, and Maurizio
D’Arienzo, Unified architecture for network measurement: The case of
available bandwidth, Journal of Network and Computer Applications
35 (2012), no. 5, 1402–1414.
[2] I Gusti Ngurah Agung, Time series data analysis using eviews, John
Wiley & Sons, 2011.
[3] Mehmet Balman, Evangelos Chaniotakisy, Arie Shoshani, and Alex
Sim, A flexible reservation algorithm for advance network provision-
ing, 2010 ACM/IEEE International Conference for High Performance
Computing, Networking, Storage and Analysis, IEEE, 2010, pp. 1–11.
[4] Kashif Bilal, Samee U Khan, Limin Zhang, Hongxiang Li, Khizar
Hayat, Sajjad A Madani, Nasro Min-Allah, Lizhe Wang, Dan Chen,
Majid Iqbal, et al., Quantitative comparisons of the state-of-the-art
data center architectures, Concurrency and Computation: Practice and
Experience 25 (2013), no. 12, 1771–1783.
[5] VNI Cisco, The zettabyte era: Trends and analysis, Cisco visual
networking white paper (2014).
[6] Paulo Cortez, Miguel Rio, Miguel Rocha, and Pedro Sousa, Multi-
scale internet traffic forecasting using neural networks and time series
methods, Expert Systems 29 (2012), no. 2, 143–155.
[7] Alaknantha Eswaradass, Xian-He Sun, and Ming Wu, Network band-
width predictor (nbp): A system for online network performance fore-
casting, Cluster Computing and the Grid, 2006. CCGRID 06. Sixth
IEEE International Symposium on, vol. 1, IEEE, 2006, pp. 4–pp.
[8] Nathan Farrington, George Porter, Sivasankar Radhakrishnan,
Hamid Hajabdolali Bazzaz, Vikram Subramanya, Yeshaiahu Fainman,
George Papen, and Amin Vahdat, Helios: a hybrid electrical/optical
switch architecture for modular data centers, ACM SIGCOMM
Computer Communication Review 41 (2011), no. 4, 339–350.
[9] Everette S Gardner Jr and ED McKenzie, Forecasting trends in time
series, Management Science 31 (1985), no. 10, 1237–1246.
[10] Albert Greenberg, James R Hamilton, Navendu Jain, Srikanth Kandula,
Changhoon Kim, Parantap Lahiri, David A Maltz, Parveen Patel, and
Sudipta Sengupta, Vl2: a scalable and flexible data center network,
Communications of the ACM 54 (2011), no. 3, 95–104.
[11] William E Griffiths, R Carter Hill, and Guay C Lim, Using eviews for
principles of econometrics, (2008).
[12] Man-Soo Han, Dynamic bandwidth allocation with high utilization for
xg-pon, 16th International Conference on Advanced Communication
Technology, IEEE, 2014, pp. 994–997.
978-1-5090-1121-6/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE
SAI Intelligent Systems Conference 2016
September 21-22, 2016 | London, UK
[13] Craig Hiemstra and Jonathan D Jones, Testing for linear and nonlinear
granger causality in the stock price-volume relation, The Journal of
Finance 49 (1994), no. 5, 1639–1664.
[14] https://en.wikipedia.org/, Autoregressive integrated moving average.
[15] Kejia Hu, Jaesik Choi, Alex Sim, and Jiming Jiang, Best predictive
generalized linear mixed model with predictive lasso for high-speed
network data analysis, International Journal of Statistics and Probability
4 (2015), no. 2, p132.
[16] Ningning Hu and Peter Steenkiste, Evaluation and characterization
of available bandwidth probing techniques, IEEE journal on Selected
Areas in Communications 21 (2003), no. 6, 879–894.
[17] Rob J Hyndman, Muhammad Akram, and Blyth C Archibald, The
admissible parameter space for exponential smoothing models, Annals
of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics 60 (2008), no. 2, 407–426.
[18] Rob J Hyndman and Yeasmin Khandakar, Automatic time series for
forecasting: the forecast package for r, Tech. report, 2007.
[19] Rob J Hyndman, Anne B Koehler, Ralph D Snyder, and Simone Grose,
A state space framework for automatic forecasting using exponential
smoothing methods, International Journal of Forecasting 18 (2002),
no. 3, 439–454.
[20] Rob J Hyndman and Andrey V Kostenko, Minimum sample size require-
ments for seasonal forecasting models, Foresight 6 (2007), no. Spring,
12–15.
[21] Cisco Visual Networking Index, Forecast and methodology, 2014–2019
white paper, cisco, 2015.
[22] Manish Jain and Constantinos Dovrolis, End-to-end available band-
width: Measurement methodology, dynamics, and relation with tcp
throughput, vol. 32, ACM, 2002.
[23] Srikanth Kandula, Sudipta Sengupta, Albert Greenberg, Parveen Patel,
and Ronnie Chaiken, The nature of data center traffic: measurements
& analysis, Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGCOMM conference on
Internet measurement conference, ACM, 2009, pp. 202–208.
[24] Dzmitry Kliazovich, Pascal Bouvry, and Samee Ullah Khan, Green-
cloud: a packet-level simulator of energy-aware cloud computing data
centers, The Journal of Supercomputing 62 (2012), no. 3, 1263–1283.
[25] Balaji Krithikaivasan, Yong Zeng, Kaushik Deka, and Deep Medhi,
Arch-based traffic forecasting and dynamic bandwidth provisioning for
periodically measured nonstationary traffic, IEEE/ACM Transactions
on Networking (TON) 15 (2007), no. 3, 683–696.
[26] Marcel Margulies and Egholm, Genome sequencing in microfabricated
high-density picolitre reactors, Nature 437 (2005), no. 7057, 376–380.
[27] Maysam Mirahmadi and Abdallah Shami, Traffic-prediction-assisted
dynamic bandwidth assignment for hybrid optical wireless networks,
Computer Networks 56 (2012), no. 1, 244–259.
[28] Vassilios C Moussas, Marios Daglis, and Eva Kolega, Network
traffic modeling and prediction using multiplicative seasonal arima
models, Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Ex-
periments/Process/System Modeling/Simulation/Optimization, Athens,
2005, pp. 6–9.
[29] Cisco Visual Networking, The zettabyte era–trends and analysis, Cisco
white paper (2013).
[30] Radhika Niranjan Mysore, Andreas Pamboris, Nathan Farrington, Nel-
son Huang, Pardis Miri, Sivasankar Radhakrishnan, Vikram Subra-
manya, and Amin Vahdat, Portland: a scalable fault-tolerant layer 2
data center network fabric, ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communica-
tion Review, vol. 39, ACM, 2009, pp. 39–50.
[31] Konstantina Papagiannaki, Nina Taft, Zhi-Li Zhang, and Christophe
Diot, Long-term forecasting of internet backbone traffic, IEEE Trans-
actions on Neural Networks 16 (2005), no. 5, 1110–1124.
[32] Yi Qiao, Jason Skicewicz, and Peter Dinda, An empirical study of
the multiscale predictability of network traffic, High performance
Distributed Computing, 2004. Proceedings. 13th IEEE International
Symposium on, IEEE, 2004, pp. 66–76.
[33] V Ribeino and Riedi R Baraniuk Retal Pathchimp, Efficient a vailable-
bandwidth estimation for network paths pam, 2003.
[34] Aimin Sang and San-qi Li, A predictability analysis of network traffic,
Computer networks 39 (2002), no. 4, 329–345.
[35] Jacob Strauss, Dina Katabi, and Frans Kaashoek, A measurement study
of available bandwidth estimation tools, Proceedings of the 3rd ACM
201 | P a g e
 SAI Intelligent Systems Conference 2016
September 21-22, 2016 | London, UK

SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement, ACM, 2003, pp. 39–

44.
[36] John W Tukey, Exploratory data analysis, (1977).
[37] Guohui Wang, David G Andersen, Michael Kaminsky, Konstantina
Papagiannaki, TS Ng, Michael Kozuch, and Michael Ryan, c-through:
Part-time optics in data centers, ACM SIGCOMM Computer Commu-
nication Review, vol. 40, ACM, 2010, pp. 327–338.
[38] Wuchert Yoo and Alex Sim, Network bandwidth utilization forecast
model on high bandwidth networks, Computing, Networking and Com-
munications (ICNC), 2015 International Conference on, IEEE, 2015,
pp. 494–498.
[39] Yang Yu, Khin Mi Mi Aung, Edmund Kheng Kiat Tong, and
Chuan Heng Foh, Dynamic load balancing multipathing in data center
ethernet, Modeling, Analysis & Simulation of Computer and Telecom-
munication Systems (MASCOTS), 2010 IEEE International Symposium
on, IEEE, 2010, pp. 403–406.
[40] Walter Zucchini and Oleg Nenadic, Time series analysis with r-part i,
Document de cours (2011).

978-1-5090-1121-6/16/$31.00 ©2016 IEEE 202 | P a g e