July 2010, Volume 7, No.7 (Serial No.

68)
Journal of Communication and Computer, ISSN 1548-7709, USA

End-to-End QoS Management Mechanism for Mobile

Network

Kwang Sik Kim1, Shintaro Uno2 and Moo Wan Kim1

1. Department of Information Systems, Tokyo University of Information Sciences, Chiba 265-8501, Japan
2. Graduate School of Engineering, Kanazawa Institute of Technology, Tokyo 105-0002, Japan

Received: March 16, 2010 / Accepted: April 12, 2010 / Published: July 25, 2010.

Abstract: Mobile multimedia communications have been tremendously increased in the number of users, diversity of applications and
of interface technologies. In this paper, we propose a new adaptive End-to-End QoS (Quality of Service) management algorithm and
signaling mechanism based on the concept of utility function which we have borrowed from the field of microeconomic. By this
mechanism, the adaptive resource allocation based on user preference in wireless portion and wired portion for mobile network can be
realized. Also, we show the simulation result for call setup and hand over with analysis.

Key words: QoS (Quality of Service), End-to-End, utility function, mobility.

1. Introduction mobile operators have an intension to differentiate

users by their rates. It is based on the idea that more
In the mobile networks, QoS (Quality of Service) is
important or valuable mobile users who pay more
being considered and studied in 3GPP(3rd Generation
payment should be prioritized for each service. To
Partnership Project) [1], where QoS is managed by
perform the differentiation, flows are becoming more
PCRF (Policy and Charging Rules Function) in IMS
adaptive in the sense that they can adjust their
architecture. Also QoS class is defined, and the
bandwidth according to the amount of resource
mapping between QCI (QoS Class Identifier) and
available. Actually, many Internet services are
DSCP (DiffServ Code Point) is studied [2]. However it
increasingly becoming adaptive and can adjust their
is not on End-to-End QoS because it is just focused on
level of performance based on the amount of the
wireless portion of the mobile network. On the other
resource available such as MPEG [4-5]. Considering
hand, in the area of the fixed network like NGN (Next
these requirements, a QoS framework has to allocate
Generation Network), there are several studies on
resource based on users’ preferences or payments and
End-to-End QoS [3], but they don’t include the
also provide the media flows with a simple way to
wireless access networks. Especially, for VoIP service
make the best use of the resources. In order to achieve
or other multimedia real time services for mobile
this, we borrow the concept of utility function from the
network, building a mechanism and an architecture is
microeconomic field. Utility function qualifies the
now required that enables an End-to-End QoS
value that an application or user receives for all
guarantee.
possible amounts of resource allocated.
Moreover, all mobile users have been managed
There are some studies based on utility functions for
equally by the mobile operators, but recently many
prioritized download service [6-7], but there are very
Corresponding author: Kwang Sik Kim, Ph.D., research few studies where utility function is adopted to
fields: ubiquitous network, mobile network, IMS. E-mail: End-to-End QoS. In this paper, we propose a new
jkskim62@yahoo.co.jp.
48 End-to-End QoS Management Mechanism for Mobile Network
adaptive End-to-End QoS management algorithm and
signaling mechanism based on utility function by
integrating End-to-End QoS and mobility management.
Also, we show the simulation result of the proposed
algorithm. The rest of the paper is organized as follows:
section 2 presents basic technologies description;
section 3 presents a description of the QoS
management mechanisms with the mobility
management; section 4 describes the associated
signaling mechanisms in the model system; section 5
presents the simulation result for call setup and hand
over with analysis; finally conclusion is described in
section 6.
2. Basic Technologies Description
This chapter describes the basic technologies
utilized to develop a proposed End-to-End QoS
management algorithm and signaling mechanism.
2.1 Utility Function
Utility function is a notation that we have borrowed
from the field of microeconomic [8] to refer to a user’s
benefit from all possible resource allocation amounts.
This work assumes that the network knows the users
utility functions by means of the signaling mechanism.
Utility functions quantify the value that an application
or users perceives for all possible amount of resource
allocated. Utility can also be thought as the price that
a user would be willing to pay to obtain a specific
amount of resource. Therefore the users can tell the
system that for obtaining χ units of resource, they are
willing to pay b $/second. We let U(χ) denote the
utility functions where χ is the amount of resource and
U(χ) is the utility obtained from that allocation. The
user’s total utility will depend on several QoS metrics,
such as bandwidth, delay, and jitter. As a first step we
are going to concentrate on this work on the case that
the users only are concerned with the bandwidth
allocation they receive. This is a step towards a more
general solution that will take into account the other
factors as well. Utility function need to satisfy the
Utility
Uj
Uj-1
r j-1 rj Throughput (Kbps)
Fig. 1 Example of utility functions.
following properties:
(1) Non-negativity: U(χ) ≥ 0 for all χ ≥ 0.
Obviously the users cannot associate a negative
utility with a positive resource allocation.
(2) Non-decreasing nature: U(χ) has to be a
non-decreasing function. Clearly also is the fact that
users cannot associate a higher utility with a smaller
allocation that with a higher allocation.
Fig. 1 shows some example of utility functions.
2.2 End-to-End QoS
The approach for End-to-End QoS in this paper is
based on the following:
y SURF (core Stateless Utility based Rate allocation
Framework) [9] for the wire line portion of the
network.
y MSS (Maximum Segmental Slope) resource
allocation algorithm [10] for the wireless portion of
the network.
2.2.1 SURF
SURF is based in the same philosophy used in the
technologies like CSFQ (Core Stateless Fair Queuing)
[11] and Corelite [12]. This approach maximizes the
aggregate utility at each link in the network and
support intra flow packet drop preferences. Key
attributes of this model are: scalability, which is
accomplished using a core-stateless architecture and
the support of intra-flow priorities. In the SURF
framework, only routers located at the edge of the
network maintain per flow state information. SURF
treat utility functions from a user’s perspective by
collapsing the entire network into a single unified
resource, neglecting any hop count.
 End-to-End QoS Management Mechanism for Mobile Network
The SURF framework has two primary concepts:
First, an ingress edge router logically partitions a flow
into sub-streams. The sub-streams correspond to
different slopes in the utility function of the flow.
Sub-streaming is done by appropriately labeling the
headers of packets using incremental utilities. Second,
a core router has no notion of a flow, and treats
packets independent of each other. The forwarding
decision at any router is based on the incremental
utility labels on the packet headers. Router does not
drop a packet with a higher incremental utility label as
long as a lower priority packet can instead be dropped.
In other words, the core router attempts to provide the
same forwarding behavior of a switch implementing a
multi-priority queue, using instead a simple FIFO
scheduling mechanism, eliminating any need for
maintaining multiple queues or sorting the queue.
The problem of dropping packets with lower
incremental utility labels before packets with a higher
incremental utility can be approximated to the
problem of dynamically computing a minimum
threshold value that a packet’s label must have, in
order for a router to forward it. We call this value the
threshold utility ut. This threshold is the minimum
incremental utility value that a packet must have in
order to be accepted by the router. Two constraints on
ut are that its value must be maintained at a level so
(a) it results in enough packets being accepted to fully
utilize the link and (b) do not cause buffer overflow at
the router. To determine a new threshold, we have
used a heuristic to determine a target value utgt such
that the allocation associated with this utgt is less than
the capacity of the link C. This is being done to reduce
the probability of tail drops significantly. utgt is based
on the average value of uί of all accepted packets and
the maximum valued uί seen in the last two epochs.
For more details on the threshold calculation please
refer to Ref. [9]. For updating the threshold, this is the
pseudo-code and definitions:
Current queue length Æ cur_qlen
Maximum Link capacity Æ max_rate
Max Queue size Æ qlim
49
Lower and Upper Q threshold Æ qlth, quth
Burstness Factor Æ Kq
Decrement factor based on Qinc Æ dec_p
Heuristic based target ut Æ utgt
Subroutine update _threshold()
if(avg_qlen < qth) or(qinc < – Kq)
change = – dec_p*ut
else if (avg_qlen > qth) or (qinc > Kq)
The forwarding algorithm is:
enqueue(pkt)
if (cur_qlen < qth) or(avg_qlen ≤ qlth )
Accete(pkt)
else if (uί ≥ ut) and (cur_qlen + pkt.size ≤ qlim)
Accept(pkt)
else Drop(pkt)
2.2.2 MSS Resource Allocation Algorithm
Let us consider the situation in which we have M
users in the system. We let Uί (rί) denote the utility
derived by user’s flow ί for a bandwidth allocation rί
and C is the total link capacity. User ί is allocated rί
units of resource that is the i-th component of the
solution r=[r1, r2, …, rM] of the following optimization
problem:
M
Max
[r1,r2, & rM]
∑Ui(ri)
i=1
(1)
M
subject to ∑ ri ≤ C
i=1
rί ≥ 0 for ί = 1,2, .. , M
The MSS algorithm is used in QoS management
framework for admission control and resource
allocation aims to satisfy Eq. (1). When the allocation
of resources via a microeconomic spot market is
analyzed, the first derivative of each buyer’s utility
function (in our case, utility as a function of
bandwidth allocated to a packet data traffic flow) is
determined in order to provide the individual demand
function of the user. That is, the quantity of the
resources a user would be willing to purchase at each
price per unit. In the case of a fixed supply of
communication channel capacity, the supply curve in
the short run would be a vertical line. The intersection
of the market price with each of the individual
demand curves of the user traffic flows determines
how much bandwidth is allocated to each flow. In
50 End-to-End QoS Management Mechanism for Mobile Network
addition the utility functions which are considered by
the MSS algorithm are only of those users who have
active session (i.e., calls).
3. Proposal of QoS Mechanisms with
Mobility
In this paper, we assume a network architectural
model presented in Fig. 2. This network architectural
model comprises RAN (Radio Access Network) with
MNs (Mobile Nodes) and CN (Core Network) with
two main players: the QS (QoS Server) and the
MM(Mobility Manager) [13].
3.1 QoS Management Mechanism
The followings are the proposed a new adaptive
QoS management algorithm of the QS based on the
utility function :
(1) QS receives resource allocation request from
caller or caller’s AR called erAR.
(2) QS generates this new flow’s entry called fi
which has the information of its caller’s access router
(fi-erAR), and callee’s access router (fi-eeAR).
(3) From (2), QS generates a list of the existing flows
that need to be re-allocated due to fi’s joining. It is
called fi-re-flow-list. This list is made of flows that are
passing through the caller and callee ARs and that are
affected by fi joining. For example, fi-erAR-re-flow-list
(for example, it includes flow-a, flow-b, flow-c, ...) and
fi-eeAR-re-flow-list (for example, it includes flow-x,
flow-y, flow-z, ...).
(4) By using the utility function based on MSS
algorithm described in 2.2.2, a temporary allocation is
Mobility
RAN Manager
Core Network
MN AP1
Access Router A
AP2 Core Routers
MN
Access Router B
MN AP3
QoS
Server
Fig. 2 Target network architecture model.
made to fi and the flows in the caller AR list. So, fi gets
fi-er-alloc (bandwidth/sec), and the flows in
fi-erAR-re-flow-list get Σfi-erAR-re-flow-list-temp-
alloc = [temp-alloc-a + temp-alloc-b + temp-alloc-c
+ ...]).
(5) Same procedures are done for the flow fi at the
callee AR. Flow fi gets fi-ee-alloc (bandwidth / sec),
and the flows in the list for callee AR
(fi-eeAR-re-flow-list) get Σfi-eeAR-re-flow-list-temp
-alloc= [temp-alloc-x + temp-alloc-y + temp-alloc-z
+ ...].
(6) QS calculates middle allocation for fi, this value
is called fi-mid-alloc which is the minimum of
[fi-er-alloc, fi -ee-alloc].
(7) Now QS will detect if there is remaining
un-utilized bandwidth in the ARs. This is done by
re-calculating the bandwidth of the other flows in
fi-erAR-re-flow-list similarly to the process above. The
calculation is done for the corresponding callee-AR of
every other flow in the list. And again a minimum is
selected for each flow. This is the last allocation for the
other flows in the caller AR. Resulting in last-alloc-a,
last-alloc-b, last-alloc-c, .... Finally, QS sums up these
values [last-alloc-a + last-alloc-b + last-alloc-c + ...]
which can be expressed in Σfi-erAR-re-flow-list-
last-alloc.
(8) In the similar manner, QS re-allocates each flow
in fi-eeAR-re-flow-list and results in
Σfi–eeAR-re-flow-list-last-alloc, which is the sum of
[last-alloc-x + last-alloc-y + last-alloc-z + ...].
(9) Then the remaining bandwidth in caller side AR
is fi-erAR-remain-bw = (fi -erAR-total-bw -
fi-mid-alloc - Σfi-erAR-re-flow-list-last-alloc).
(10) Similar, the remaining bandwidth in the callee
side AR is calculated in the way as above and results in
fi -eeAR-remain-bw = (fi-eeAR-total-bw - fi-mid-alloc
- Σfi –eeAR-re-flow-list-last-alloc).
(11) Then the remaining bandwidth for caller AR
and callee AR for the flow fi is remain-bw = min [fi
-erAR-remain-bw, fi-eeAR-remain-bw ].
(12) At last, as the result, the final allocation for fi
 End-to-End QoS Management Mechanism for Mobile Network
is = [fi -mid-alloc + remain-bw].
The algorithm takes into consideration the resources
over the air-links of the two ends of the call in RAN
and performs a “local” allocation for the wireless link.
In addition, the algorithm treats the resources in CN as
being “not over-provisioned” meaning that resources
need to be efficiently administered over every link
between the routers.
3.2 Mobility Management
In order for mobility management, MM uses
information (e.g., signaling strength) from MN and
mobility profile (e.g., user location, frequency of user
movement) as mobility triggers for handover. Such
mobility triggers are used to initiate the resource
allocation at the AR. When a MN move from one AR
to another due to user’s mobility, resources must be
allocated for the MN in the new AR, and the already
allocated resources in the old AR should be released.
Moreover, in case if sufficient resources are not
available at the new AR, the QS should be able to
adaptively adjust the level of service offered.
Thus, MM needs to interact with QS to ensure the
satisfied QoS for the MN located in the new AR. In this
perspective, integration of mobility management and
QoS mechanism is essential to provide the mobility to
the user roaming from to ARs.
4. Model System Description
In this paper, we classify 4 classes of signaling
messages.
(1) Path signaling: These messages traverse the data
path of the flows, will be processed by routers in the
path from source to destination. We use proprietary
version of RSVP (Resource Reservation Protocol)
[14] called RSVPLA (Resource Reservation Protocol
Light Approach) which is a light End-to-End
signaling.
(2) Access signaling: These message travels
between the MN and the AR. As these signals use last
hop air-link, the frequency and size of messages must
51
be kept to a minimum. Specific signaling depends on
wireless access technologies.
(3) Server signaling: Many entities in a network may
need to communicate with each other. MM and QS
should communicate to enable handover. In this paper,
we use COPS (Common Open Policy Service)
signaling [15].
(4) Control signaling: This signaling refers to layer 3
messages support call control and mobility
management. Proxy MIP (Mobile IP) [16], SIP
(Session Initiation Protocol) [17] signaling may be
considered as candidate signaling. In this paper, we use
SIP in order to verify the feasibility of integration of
QoS and mobility management. We don’t extend it to
MN as usual SIP operation does; this is done to allow
the use of non-SIP capable legacy MN.
4.1 Call Setup
Fig. 3 shows the call setup signaling and the entities
involved.
(1) MN1 sends Call Request to AR1 with application
ID. This Call Request message is functionally similar
to SIP INVITE.
(2) AR1 responds with Wait Signal and forwards
MN1’s request to MM.
(3) MM finds the callee’s location (i.e., under AR2)
and sends SIP INVITE to callee’s AR2.
(4) With the recognition of QoS call request and
confirming that the callee is attached to AR2, AR2
answers with a reliable provisional response: 183
Session Progress. At this time, AR2 doesn’t alert the
caller until all the mandatory QoS preconditions in the
answer are met later.
(5) MM confirms the callee’s existence and then
sends MM SIP INVITE to caller’s AR1 with callee’s
location information (e.g., under AR2).
(6) Same as (4), AR1 answers with a reliable
provisional response: 183 Session Progress. At the
same time, with the callee’s location information
written in received INVITE message, caller’s AR1
sends RSVPLA PATH message to callee’s AR2 to
52 End-to-End QoS Management Mechanism for Mobile Network

MN1 AR1 MM QS CRs AR2 MN2

C a ll R e q u e s t

W a it S ig n a l C a ll R e q u e s t
IN V IT E

1 8 3 S e s sio n P r o g re ss
IN V IT E
PRACK
1 8 3 S e s sio n P r o g re s s
2 0 0 O K (P R A C K )
PRACK

2 0 0 O K (P R A C K )

R S V P L A PAT H

RSVP RESP

COPS REQ

COPS DEC COPS DEC

C a ll R e q u e s t
2 0 0 O K (IN V IT E )
1 8 0 R in g in g
R in g in g
N O T IF Y (rin g in g )

R in g in g
C a ll R e sp o n se
2 0 0 O K (N O T IF Y )
2 0 0 O K (IN V IT E )

ACK ACK
S e n d in g P e rm it
S e n d in g P e rm it

DDATA
ATA D ATA DDATA
ATA

Fig. 3 Call setup signaling.

probe core network’s availability. This PATH message information, requested bandwidth, and core network’s
will be forwarded by CR (Core Router) and thus this Uth, and available bandwidth are listed in this message.
message collects each CR’s Utility Threshold (Uth) (11) QS checks its database for the utility function
based on SURF described in 2.2.1 and available associated with the caller and application ID and does
bandwidth. bandwidth allocation calculation for this session, and
(7) MM generates PRACK response to 183 to then send this allocation to caller’s AR1 and callee’s
caller’s AR1 and callee’s AR2. AR2 with COPS DEC message.
(8) Caller’s AR1 and callee’s AR2 send back 200OK (12) With this QoS notification, AR1 can answer the
to answer PRACK. early INVITE request with 200 OK to MM. Although
(9) AR2 receives RSVPLA message which records the QoS preconditions are met, AR1 doesn’t alert caller
CR’s highest Uth and lowest available BW (CN-a-BW) to send data packet at this time, since the session has
and sends these values in RSVPLA RESP message not been established yet.
back to AR1. (13) At the callee’s side, AR2 alerts callee MN2 with
(10) AR1 sends bandwidth request using COPS proprietary Call Request message and sends a
REQ message to QS. Caller, callee’s location provisional response (180 Ringing) to answer the early
 End-to-End QoS Management Mechanism for Mobile Network 53

INVITE request from MM. 4.2 Call Hand Over

(14) MM may pass this information to AR1 and
When a MN moves from one AR to another,
MN1 by SIP NOTIFY message.
resources must be reserved for the MN in the new AR
(15) When MN2 picks up the phone, AR2 receives
and resources that were reserved in the old AR should
Call Response message from MN2 and answers
be released. If the network route changes due to HO
INVITE with the definitive response 200 OK to MM.
(Hand Over), resources in new network links that may
(16) At this time, MM receives two final responses
be used to reach the new AR need to be probed and
for the early two INVITE requests. It sends ACK to
released in old links.
both caller and callee.
Fig. 4 shows the HO signaling and the entities
(17) After receiving this ACK, ARs notice caller
involved. When a HO is about to occur, the MM
and callee with Sending Permit message. The final
initiates HO signaling based on inputs from the MN
allocated BW is listed. If necessary, ARs may do a
and/or ARs that the MN is adjacent to. In details, MM
re-allocation that block calls with lower utility
needs to setup another session with the moving node’s
functions.
new AR using SIP INVITE method and modify the
(18) After receiving Sending Permit, the caller and
established session with the corresponding node’s AR
callee begin to exchange data packets using notified
using SIP Re-INVITE method. After the new session
bandwidth for the communication.
setup, MM should close the old session using SIP BYE.

MN1 AR1 MM QS CRs AR3 AR2 MN2

D ATA D ATA D ATA

R e -R E G IS T E R
R e -IN V IT E IN V IT E

1 8 3 S e s s io n P r o g r e s s 1 8 3 S e s s io n P r o g r e s s

PRACK PRACK

2 0 0 O K (P R A C K ) 2 0 0 O K (P R A C K )

R S V P L A PAT H

RSVP RESP

COPS REQ

COPS DEC COPS DEC

2 0 0 O K (R e -IN V IT E )

2 0 0 O K (IN V IT E )

ACK ACK
C a ll n o tify C a ll n o tify

D ATA D ATA

BYE

2 0 0 O K (B Y E )

C O P S n o tify

Fig. 4 Hand over call signaling.

54 End-to-End QoS Management Mechanism for Mobile Network

MN1 MM QS MN17 threshold (Uth) of core routers is set to be zero where all
AR4
MN2 AR1 MN18 packets are passed through.
MN3 CR3 CR6 CR7 MN19
CR1 CR2 5.2 Simulations
MN4 MN20

CR4 AR5
MN5
AR2 MN13 MN14 MN15 MN16
MN6
CR5
MN7
MN8
AR3
MN9 MN10 MN11 MN12
Fig. 5 Simulated network model system.
In the lower end of the Fig. 4, we can observe that if
necessary other terminals in the target cell will have
re-allocated their resources or blocked; however this
will depend on the utility function of the HO call. If the
HO call has lower utility than other calls in the cell,
then probably depending on operator policies, there
will be re-allocations only. If the HO session can’t be
setup successfully in the next cell (due to cell
congestion or other factors related to utility allocation),
the call should be kept until the current radio access is
disconnected. When either caller or callee’s AR detects
the session termination (how the AR detects that the
radio link is down is out of scope of this paper), it
should notify MM by using SIP BYE. Then the MM
uses the same method to notify the AR of the other
calling party. Whenever the AR receives SIP BYE, it
should notify QS to update its bandwidth database.
5. Evaluations
5.1 Simulation Conditions
We have used the NS2 simulator for our simulations
with the topology shown in Fig. 5. We have
implemented call setup and hand over signaling with
the proposed QoS management algorithm. Each access
router has 4 units of bandwidth to administrate (1 unit =
40 kbps) and the data flows use RTP packets. The
results in the following graphs show the results in
bandwidth when there are non handover and handover
in different conditions. In this simulation, the utility
For the non handover call simulation for simple
flows evaluation, MN1, 2, 3 and 4 under AR1 have
sessions with MN5, 9, 13, and 17 respectively. Flow1,
2, 3 and 4 have utility functions shown in Table 1
respectively. Flow1 in Fig. 6 enters the network at time
10s. As it is the only flow in the system, it is allocated
the entire AR1’s bandwidth. At time 20s, flow2 enters
the network. From MSS algorithm, flow1 and flow2
should be allocated by 2 units and this is shown in Fig.
6. Then at time 30s, with flow3’s join, the allocation
becomes f1:f2:f3 = 2:1:1. Finally after f4 enters, each
flow has same bandwidth at receiver and this is the
allocation theoretically.
For the simulation for simple flows evaluation
including handover, MN2, 6 and 8 have sessions with
MN9, 10 and 14 respectively. Fig. 7 shows the
receiving rate of the terminal when a handover takes
place. Utility value of Flow-big, between MN2 and
MN9, Flow-small between MN6 and MN10, and
Flow-h (hand over), between MN8 and MN14 are
listed in Table 2. Flow-h starts its call at 30 sec and
MN8 starts to move toward to new-AR (AR3) at 40 sec.
Before Flow-h enters to AR3, there are two flows in
AR3, our algorithm will therefore allocate 2 units of
bandwidth to each flow (Flow-big and Flow-small).
Once a new terminal, with an additional utility function
joins an area controlled by a AR, there is a need to
re-allocate the existing resources among the users in
the cell according to the values that the users have
contracted. Hence when Flow-h enters the area of AR3,
Table 1 Utility values for flows.
Flow 1U 2U 3U 4U
Flow1 0.9 0.3 0.15 0.1
Flow2 0.8 0.25 0.14 0.1
Flow3 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.1
Flow4 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.1
 End-to-End QoS Management Mechanism for Mobile Network 55

Fig. 6 Simple flows evaluation.

Fig. 7 Simple flows evaluation including hand over.

Table 2 Utility values for flows. For more complicated simulation including
Flow 1U 2U 3U 4U handover, Fig. 8 shows cases in which there are 8
Flow_big 0.7 0.5 0.14 0.1 sessions simultaneously running, while one flow (flow
Flow_small 0.45 0.3 0.14 0.1
6) makes a handover. The different flows utilized one
Flow_handover 0.5 0.4 0.14 0.1
of the utility functions listed in Table 3. Regarding
the allocation becomes Flow-big : Flow-h:Flow-small flow 1 to flow 4, they are the same as Fig. 6 and flow5,
= 2 : 1 : 1 units. The reason for this allocation is that in flow 6, flow 7 and flow8 are from MN6 to MN10,
this case Flow-big has higher utility than Flow-h and from MN8 to MN14, from MN11 to MN18 and from
therefore it is not affected by Flow-h joining the cell. MN15 to MN19 respectively. In this simulation, MN8
On the other side, Flow-small has lower utility than will move from AR2 to AR3 so that at AR3
Flow-h and therefore one unit is re-allocated to Flow-h. bandwidth will be reallocated. From this result we can
56 End-to-End QoS Management Mechanism for Mobile Network

Fig. 8 Multiple flows evaluation for hand over.

Table 3 Utility values for flows.

5.3 Analysis of Simulation Results
Flow 1U 2U 3U 4U
Flow1 0.9 0.3 0.15 0.1 Through the simulations, we have analyzed the facts
Flow2 0.8 0.25 0.14 0.1
from the results as below.
Flow3 0.7 0.2 0.2 0.1
Flow4 0.4 0.4 0.1 0.1
(1) We have confirmed that the allocation in the
Flow5 0.6 0.52 0.14 0.1 simulation is equal to the allocation calculated in
Flow6* 0.45 0.3 0.14 0.1 theoretically. Actually the algorithm and sequences
Flow7 0.4 0.25 0.14 0.1 were implemented in this simulation and it is
Flow8 0.24 0.15 0.14 0.1
confirmed that allocation in Fig. 6 is equal to the
confirm that the final allocation done by our algorithm allocation calculated theoretically. It is also confirmed
shown in Fig. 8 is equal to the allocation calculated that the allocation in Fig. 7 and Fig. 8 is equal to the
theoretically. We can observe that due to its utility theoretical allocation in handover.
being higher than the threshold, this bandwidth is not (2) Normally, when the bandwidth is fully utilized
degraded and stays constant after the hand over (flow (i.e., congested), the new service request (i.e., new call)
6). From the simulation results of Fig. 6, Fig. 7 and Fig. is rejected and in case of handover, the flow is
8, it is also clear that the End-to-End delay related to suspended (i.e., mobility service is suspended). By this
allocation sequences is very low. method, however, since the priority control can be
This results validates the basic concept we are ought managed by handling the value of the utility functions,
to prove, that is, if a user with a higher utility value, the new service can be prioritized even in the congested
joins a group of users which have lower utility values, situation including handover cases. That is, from the
the allocation of resources is distributed fairly among user’s viewpoint, the users’ satisfaction will be
the users. Fair here means that the ones that pay more increased even in the congested or handover situation
for resources, receive more that those who pay less by this mechanism.
achieving a higher quality of experience. This is the (3) From the operator’s viewpoint, the revenue of
main value of utilizing the utility functions as tool for operators will be increased by using this method.
resource allocation. Actually by this method it is confirmed that the
 End-to-End QoS Management Mechanism for Mobile Network
bandwidth can be utilized at maximum. If service price
is linked to the value of the utility function, the user
will pay more payment so that the operators can obtain
more revenue and profit.
(4) We can expect that the situation for some heavy
users to dominate the resources will be avoided by
managing utility functions. In case that there are heavy
traffic users whose incremental value of utility
functions is not high, in the congested traffic
environment, the heavy traffic users are affected by
users whose incremental value of utility functions is
higher so that it can avoid for heavy users, whose
incremental value of utility functions is lower, to
dominate the resources in the congested traffic
environment. It means that we can control this
mechanism to be applied to some limited users, not to
all users.
6. Conclusions
In this paper, we have proposed a new adaptive
End-to-End QoS management algorithm based on the
utility function and its integration with a SIP based
generic mobility management protocol. The adaptive
resource allocation based on user preference in
wireless and wired networks can be realized by this
mechanism. Also, this mechanism can be realized in
handover without restrictions, and realized by
centralized allocator via the access routers acting as
policy control enforcement point. Through the
simulations, we confirmed the following facts.
(1) The users’ satisfaction will be increased even in
the congested or handover situation by using this
mechanism.
(2) The revenue of operators will be increased by
using this mechanism.
(3) Available to avoid heavy users to dominate the
resources by managing utility functions in this
mechanism.
For further step, we may expand this mechanism on
the following points.
(1) As for the incremental value assignment of utility
57
function for each flow, we assume two ways. The first
is the mobile operators may define utility functions for
flows and save the information in QoS server, the
second is the mobile users may select a utility function
for a flow and send this information to QoS server by
using signaling.
(2) In case the incremental value of user’s utility
function is not high, and a new flow, where it’s
incremental value of utility function is higher, is
generated, the existing service may be suspended based
on the proposed mechanism. To avoid such case, our
mechanism can be modified slightly so as to whole
existing services should be guaranteed with some
minimum bandwidth.
(3) Not only aspect of bandwidth allocation, but
other QoS metrics such as the delay or jitter can be
studied in the next step.
References
[1] 3GPP TS 29.212, 3rd Generation Partnership Project,
Technical Specification Group Core Network and
Terminals, Policy and Charging Control over Gx
Reference Point (Release 8), Sept. 2008.
[2] R. Ludwig, H. Eksrom, P. Willars, N. Lundin, An
Evolved 3GPP QoS Concept, VTC Spring 2006, May
2006.
[3] Y. Kaneda, Policy-based end-to-end QoS guarantee using
On-Path signaling for both QoS requests and feedback,
ICOIN 2008, I-1, Jan. 2008.
[4] S.M. Canne, V. Jacobson, M. Vetterli, Receiver-driven
layered multicast, in: Proc. ACM SIGCOMM 96,
Standford, CA, 1996, pp.117-130.
[5] T. Yoshimura, T. Ohya, T. Kawahara, M. Etoh, A QoS
control method of MPEG video with an RTP monitoring
agent for mobile streaming service, IEICE, 2002,
pp.1243-1253.
[6] K. Nomura, K. Yamori, E. Takahashi, T. Miyoshi, Y.
Tanaka, Waiting time versus utility to download images,
APSITT2001, 2001, pp.128-132.
[7] K. Yamori, Y. Tanaka, Relation between willingness to
pay and guaranteed minimum bandwidth in multiple-
priority services, APCC2004, 2004, pp.113-117.
[8] H.R. Varian, Microeconomic Analysis, W. W. Norton and
Co., 1992.
[9] N. Venkitaraman, J. Misore, A core stateless utility based
rate allocation framework, in: Proceeding of INCP2001,
2001.
[10] O. Gonzalez, F. Gotoh, S. Gilbert, Maximum network
58 End-to-End QoS Management Mechanism for Mobile Network
operator revenue resource allocation, in: 2002 IEICE
Society Conference, Sept. 2002.
[11] R.J. Gibbens, F.P. Kelly, Resource pricing and the
evolution of congestion control, Automatic 35 (1999)
1969-1985.
[12] F.P. Kelly, A.K. Maulloo, D.K.H. Tan, Rate control for
communication networks: shadow prices, proportional
fairness and stability, Journal of Operations Research
Society 49 (1998) 237-252.
[13] C. Politis et al., Cooperative networks for the future
wireless world, IEEE Commu. Mag. (2004) 70-79.
[14] R. Braden, L. Jhang, S. Berson, et al., Resource
reservation protocol, RFC2205, IETF, 1997.
[15] D. Durham, J. Boyle, R. Cohen, et al., Common open
policy service, RFC2748, IETF, 2002.
[16] S. Gundavelli, K. Leung, V. Devarapalli, et al., Proxy
mobile IPv6, draft-ietf-netlmm-proxymip6-18.txt, IETF,
2008.
[17] A. Johnston, R. Sparks, M. Handley, R. Schooler, J.
Rosenberg, J. Peterson, H. Schulzrinne, G. Camarillo, SIP:
session initiation protocol, RFC 3261, Proposed Standard,
IETF, 2002.