Cover Image

An analysis and comparison between new buffering design with Priority Queuing (Pq) algorithm and SPBA algorithm for VOIP

This paper showed an analysis and comparison between new buffer design with both concept buffers in the PQ algorithm and SPBA algorithm. In the PQ algorithm, there are four buffering packet are low, normal, medium and high. The buffering packet in PQ algorithm is greedy. However, fourth the buffe...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Suardinata, Suardinata, Abu Bakar, Kamalrulnizam, Suanma, Nimitr
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security (IJCSNS) 2011
Subjects:
QA75 Electronic computers. Computer science
Online Access:http://eprints.utm.my/id/eprint/33971/2/20110626.pdf
http://eprints.utm.my/id/eprint/33971/
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
id my.utm.33971
record_format eprints
spelling my.utm.339712017-02-15T00:25:52Z http://eprints.utm.my/id/eprint/33971/ An analysis and comparison between new buffering design with Priority Queuing (Pq) algorithm and SPBA algorithm for VOIP Suardinata, Suardinata Abu Bakar, Kamalrulnizam Suanma, Nimitr QA75 Electronic computers. Computer science This paper showed an analysis and comparison between new buffer design with both concept buffers in the PQ algorithm and SPBA algorithm. In the PQ algorithm, there are four buffering packet are low, normal, medium and high. The buffering packet in PQ algorithm is greedy. However, fourth the buffering is not optimal used. It is caused by PQ algorithm is based on the priority, whereas this buffering just always serviced is the highest priority. While under priority are rarely or never serviced will cause other buffering rarely used. While SPBA algorithm is architecture easiest, and it does not need any resource reservation or threshold dropping, but only makes use of priority scheduling. SPBA algorithm, where incoming packets are placed into the two priority traffic classes is the high class and low class. On the SPBA algorithm is there are not available reservation sources to save the remaining packets when the explosion (burst) traffic occurred, that could result in packet drop and packet loss. Then, with the efficiency of PQ buffering algorithm, can provide greater impact to reduce delays. In the new buffering algorithm, simplify four buffering into three packets (High, Medium and Low) is proposed. In the analysis and comparison new buffering algorithm could be known problems and weaknesses of both algorithms. International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security (IJCSNS) 2011 Article PeerReviewed text/html en http://eprints.utm.my/id/eprint/33971/2/20110626.pdf Suardinata, Suardinata and Abu Bakar, Kamalrulnizam and Suanma, Nimitr (2011) An analysis and comparison between new buffering design with Priority Queuing (Pq) algorithm and SPBA algorithm for VOIP. International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security, 11 (6). pp. 173-179. ISSN 1738-7906
institution Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
building UTM Library
collection Institutional Repository
continent Asia
country Malaysia
content_provider Universiti Teknologi Malaysia
content_source UTM Institutional Repository
url_provider http://eprints.utm.my/
language English
topic QA75 Electronic computers. Computer science
spellingShingle QA75 Electronic computers. Computer science
Suardinata, Suardinata
Abu Bakar, Kamalrulnizam
Suanma, Nimitr
An analysis and comparison between new buffering design with Priority Queuing (Pq) algorithm and SPBA algorithm for VOIP
description This paper showed an analysis and comparison between new buffer design with both concept buffers in the PQ algorithm and SPBA algorithm. In the PQ algorithm, there are four buffering packet are low, normal, medium and high. The buffering packet in PQ algorithm is greedy. However, fourth the buffering is not optimal used. It is caused by PQ algorithm is based on the priority, whereas this buffering just always serviced is the highest priority. While under priority are rarely or never serviced will cause other buffering rarely used. While SPBA algorithm is architecture easiest, and it does not need any resource reservation or threshold dropping, but only makes use of priority scheduling. SPBA algorithm, where incoming packets are placed into the two priority traffic classes is the high class and low class. On the SPBA algorithm is there are not available reservation sources to save the remaining packets when the explosion (burst) traffic occurred, that could result in packet drop and packet loss. Then, with the efficiency of PQ buffering algorithm, can provide greater impact to reduce delays. In the new buffering algorithm, simplify four buffering into three packets (High, Medium and Low) is proposed. In the analysis and comparison new buffering algorithm could be known problems and weaknesses of both algorithms.
format Article
author Suardinata, Suardinata
Abu Bakar, Kamalrulnizam
Suanma, Nimitr
author_facet Suardinata, Suardinata
Abu Bakar, Kamalrulnizam
Suanma, Nimitr
author_sort Suardinata, Suardinata
title An analysis and comparison between new buffering design with Priority Queuing (Pq) algorithm and SPBA algorithm for VOIP
title_short An analysis and comparison between new buffering design with Priority Queuing (Pq) algorithm and SPBA algorithm for VOIP
title_full An analysis and comparison between new buffering design with Priority Queuing (Pq) algorithm and SPBA algorithm for VOIP
title_fullStr An analysis and comparison between new buffering design with Priority Queuing (Pq) algorithm and SPBA algorithm for VOIP
title_full_unstemmed An analysis and comparison between new buffering design with Priority Queuing (Pq) algorithm and SPBA algorithm for VOIP
title_sort analysis and comparison between new buffering design with priority queuing (pq) algorithm and spba algorithm for voip
publisher International Journal of Computer Science and Network Security (IJCSNS)
publishDate 2011
url http://eprints.utm.my/id/eprint/33971/2/20110626.pdf
http://eprints.utm.my/id/eprint/33971/
_version_ 1643649483961008128
score 13.211869

Similar Items