Analysis of QoS

Arjuna Mithra Sreenivasan

 Objectives
• Explain the different queuing techniques.
• Describe factors affecting network voice quality.
• Analyse the Effects of using different queuing
techniques.
• Evaluating Queuing techniques by measuring
QoS parameters.
 Topics

• Why QoS for voice

• QoS Review

• Queuing Techniques for VoIP

 Network Convergence
• Run Data ,Voice and other application on the same
network.
-High availability of bandwidth.
• Reduced Costs.
-One infrastructure to maintain.
-Aggregated bandwidth (cheaper).
-PBX and trunking costs.
 Why QoS for voice
• QoS protects voice over shared media.
-the criminal: bursty data application.
-loss of 2 packets lowers the quality of voice.
• QoS can prioritise VoIP
-VoIP is sensitive to delay ,jitter and packet loss.
-Prioritisation minimise those effects.
Operation of QoS
 Queuing techniques
• Priority Queue(PQ)-Strict • Low Latency Queue(LLQ)-
priority for important traffic. Combination of PQ and
• Weighted Fair Queue(WFQ)-It CBWFQ.
schedules interactive traffic to
the front of the queue to
reduce delay, and shares the
remaining bandwidth between
high bandwidth flows.
• Class based WFQ(CBWFQ)-
extends the standard WFQ
functionality to provide support
for user-defined traffic classes.
 Experimental Design

Site 1 R1 Site 2 R2

S0/0
192.168.100. S0/0
1 192.168.100.2
Internet
Fa0/1 S0/0
192.168.11.254
Fa0/1

192.168.10.254

File server
(FTP)
192.168.11.2

TRIXBOX IP-
PBX
192.168.0.10

192.168.11. X 192.168.10. X
 Experimental Methodology
• Two experiments were conducted
-Without QoS
-With QoS
 Experiment 1 (Without QoS)
• QoS Parameters is measured.
• The same experiment is conducted by reducing
the bandwidth, to create congestion and QoS
parameters are measured.
• First, calls are initiated, simultaneously the FTP
server is accessed.
 Analysis of Experiment 1 Results
• The experiment is conducted with the link speed
of 1.5 Mbps.
• Delay was maintained at 60ms.
• Jitter and packet loss was negligible.
• The experiment was conducted with 0.75 Mbps.
• Resulted in packet loss and jitters.
 Experiment 2(With QoS)
• The experiment was conducted by marking
voice packets and implementing queuing
techniques.
• Traffic were identified and grouped into a class
and QoS was applied to the traffic classes.
• PQ,WFQ,CBWFQ and LLQ were the queuing
techniques configured.
• Performance of each queuing technique was
observed.
 Analysis of Experiment 2 Results.
• The PQ is configured on each router. Voice
packets are on high priority.
• PQ was configured by creating a priority list and
specifying the protocol (udp) and mapping it to
the access-list, which specify the udp traffic.
• The quality of voice was good, but affects FTP
application.
 Experiment 2(With QoS)
• WFQ was configured on serial interfaces of both
routers.
• Thresholds were configured default, where high
bandwidth conversations were dropped.
• Jitters obtained did not affect the voice quality,
because delay was maintained 70 ms after 8th
minute.
• The packet loss was found of 3% for 3-4 mins.
• FTP was frozen for few mins.
 Experiment 2(With QoS)
• CBWFQ is configured on both the routers.
• The is variation in jitters and packet loss which is
negligible.

• LLQ has given good results.

• Delay was constant and packet loss was
negligible.
 Conclusion
• To achieve reliable, high-quality voice over an IP
network, which is designed for data communication is an
engineering challenge.
• To achieve reliable, high-quality voice over an IP
network, which is designed for data communication is an
engineering challenge.
• According to above experiments performed, LLQ has
better performed than any other queuing mechanism.
Here voice packets are marked using EF for voice which
given a very good result with LLQ.