International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 4 Issue 9 Sep 2013

ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page 3022

Multi Input Multi Output Network Systems with
Explicit Rate Schemes

Satyavathi Gantala
1
, Boppudi Swanth
2
, BetamSuresh
3

1
pursuing M.Tech (CSE) Vikas Group of Institutions (Formerly known as Mother Theresa Educational Society Group
of Institutions), Affiliated to JNTU- Kakinada, Vijayawada, A.P. India.
2
working as a Asst. Professor, Department of Computer science Engineering at Vikas Group of Institutions, Nunna,
Vijayawada, Affiliated to JNTU- Kakinada, India.

3
working as an HOD at Vikas Group of Institutions (Formerly known as Mother Theresa Educational Society Group
of Institutions), Nunna, Vijayawada, Affiliated to JNTU- Kakinada, India.


Abstract--In Multi-InputMulti-Output Network System
applications data is shared over the network. Presently
with the increase in such kind of networks there are many
limitations such as loss of data, speed of network, network
congestion, to make an effective network we have focused
on the design of an application services called "Multi-input
Multi-output network systems". In this paper we describe
two algorithms that can be used for the data transfer
among the network systems and also the data storage. This
algorithm shows the control mechanism which can be used
to design a controller to support Multi-input Multi-output
transmission network.


Keywords multi-input multi-output system (MIMO),
network congestion, speeds of network, data storage.


I. INTRODUCTION

Networking is the medium for data transfer between
two or more systems; because of networking we can
achieve the concept of distributed architecture in an
application. A language will become distributed if and
only if it is allowing its users to share their views from
over a distance without being face to face. In this paper
we are using networking as a medium and then showing
the communication among the nodes without loss of
data and in an efficient manner.

Networking is the process of communication among
systems which share data. Networking can be achieved
with the help of two protocols i.e. TCP and UDP. Both
these protocols are basically used for the data transfer.
Apart from these we have other protocols which have
their own functionality like,

POP Post Office Protocol for mailing purpose

SMTP Simple Mail Transfer Protocol for mailing
purpose.

IP - Internet Protocol for the systems in LAN

FTP File Transfer Protocol for files transfer.

As seen above we have different protocols which
perform different tasks and depending upon our
requirement we can choose the protocols. Coming with
this paper as we need to show the process among the
systems; we are going with the TCP protocol for the
data communication. Networking is the most important
concept and the user need to take care about the
implementation because the data availability is
dependent on this factor and if the data is not made
available to the user then there will be complete loss to
the overall system. Coming with TCP and UDP, TCP is
more preferred because of the data transmission rate
which is high when compared to UDP. TCP is called
connection oriented because node is dependent on the
other for the communication purpose and coming with
UDP it is called connectionless because here each and
every node is independent of the other nodes. As the
nodes are independent there is no guarantee that all the
data sent will reach the destination in time and safely,
but whereas coming with TCP as the nodes are
dependent the data transferred will be acknowledged
and data will be safe at any given point of time in
network. Network has got many other ways for the
communication i.e. half duplex, full duplex. Apart from
this sending of data over the network is also given
different names likes, Broadcast, Multicast, Unicast.

Broadcast is the process of sending the information to
the nodes connected in a network, Multicast is the
process of sending the data over the network to a
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 4 Issue 9 Sep 2013
ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page 3023

specific group and Unicast is the process of sending the
data to a specific node in the network.


Fig: 1 Multicast configuration showing multiple points to multiple
points
Network communication happens over the network in
the form of packets transfer. Each and every node in the
network sends and receives data in the form of packets
only. This flow of packets in the network is handled by
two algorithms in the network which are SPID and SPI
algorithms.

These algorithms are basically used to control the flow
of packets in the network i.e., upstream and
downstream. Upstream refers to sender to receiver and
downstream refers to receiver to sender. On the basis of
previous transfers, the buffer occupancy of the switch
node i is determined by,

xi (n+1) =SatKi {xi(n+ cq
m
q
Rq(n-Ti-Li)} (1)

where Ki is the buffer size, Xi (n) is the buffer
occupancy of the switch node I at time slot n and Rq (n-
Ti) is the sending rate of the qth (1qm)source to the
switch node i(1 i N) with

SatKi {xi} =_
Ki,xi >Ki
xi,0 xi ki
0,xi 0
_

And

eq=_
1,i tc qt sourcc is octi:c
0,i tc qt sourcc is not octi:c
1
_
After lifting the saturation restriction (1) can be written
as
Xi (n+1) =xi (n) + cqRq(n Ii) Ii.
m

q=1
(2)

In general, among all the downstream nodes, the most
congested one is defined as the worst node and needs
more attention. On this basis we propose a control
scheme,
Rq (n) =+a xi(n Ti) xi
n
n
I=1
) + bjRq(j) +
T
1
j=1
c xk(nTk) xk (nTk1
N
1
k=1
) (3)

These coefficients are used to locate all the poles of the
closed-loop equations (2) and (3) within the unit circle
to ensure stability. The component xi is the target
queue length and is the maximum sending rate of
sources. To save computation time and CPU resources,
we present a simple SPI control scheme,

Rq (n) = +a xi(nTi) xi
N
I
I=1
) + bjRq(n
T
j
j=1
j) (4)

Similarly, these coefficients should make all the poles of
the closed-loop equations (2) and (4) within the unit
circle to ensure stability. In (3) and (4), if the buffer
occupancy of the switch node i is measured at the
instances n i, after the feedback delay i, the BCP
reaches the controller located at the source q (q =1, 2 .
. . m), and the source then takes out the buffer
occupancy of the destination nodes at time slot t =n. By
doing so, the proposed controller can be expected to
have flexibility to cope with the sharp oscillation in
buffer occupancy that could cause the network to lose
packets. In addition, the calculation in (3) and (4) is
completely independent of virtual connections traveling
through the multicast session. This means the scheme
has scalability.

SPID and SPI Algorithms:

SPID stands for Statistical Protocol Identification, it is
used in the application layer of the network for the
communication purpose, which reliably identifies the
application layer protocol by using statistical
measurements of flow data as well as application layer
data. The SPID algorithm utilizes Kullback-Leibler
divergence measurements to compare probability
vectors created from observed network traffic to
probability vectors of known protocols.

The SPID algorithm is designed to reliably identify
which protocol is being used in a network
communication session. Key requirements for the
algorithm are:

1. Small protocol database size
2. Low time complexity
3. Early identification of the protocol in a session
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 4 Issue 9 Sep 2013
ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page 3024

4. Reliable and accurate protocol identification

The motivation for these requirements 1 and 2 are that it
shall be possible to run the SPID algorithm in real-time
on an embedded network controller, which has restricted
memory and converting capability. Motivation for
fulfilling 3 is that it shall be possible to use the results
from the SPID algorithm in a live traffic capturing
environment to automatically take precautions in order
to provide quality service to an active session, block
illicit traffic or store related traffic for off-line analysis1.
Haffner et al. (2005) also point out the need for
enterprises to degrade P2P services (via rate-limiting,
service differentiation and blocking) on their networks
in favour of the performance for business critical
applications. I have therefore required that the protocol
must be identifiable, with the SPID algorithm, based on
only the four first application data packets (i.e. not
counting the flow control signaling packets) for a
session. Note 4 have no further motivation than the
obvious in order to provide a high quality service.
SPID performs protocol identification by using
statistical fingerprints. The statistical fingerprints, of a
session or known protocol, are part of an object called
Protocol Model. Here application layer protocol in a
session is identified by comparing its protocol model to
protocol models of known protocols.


Fig 2: Process Identification Data Flow

The SPID algorithm present a reliable method for
identifying protocols based on both flow and
application. Strong identification feature is a result of
the innovative protocol attribute functions; this protocol
gives rich data format and the model comparison
algorithm.

The SPID algorithm does not require any manual
creation of protocol signatures; but it does require
training data that is pre-classified based on protocol, in
order to generate a protocol model DB. Protocol model
content format allows for the protocol models to be
updated as new training data made avail, without having
access to the last used training data.

SPI (Symbolic Probabilistic Inference) algorithm is used
for resolving general queries in Bayesian Networks.
Algorithm SPI implements the concept of dependency
directed backward search to probabilistic content, and is
incremented with respect to both the queries and
observations.

The SPI algorithm consists of several major processing
steps. The first step is to organize the nodes of a
Bayesian network into a tree structure for query
processing. We call these structures SPI trees. In the
second step, queries are directed to the root node of the
SPI tree. The query is decomposed into queries for the
node's sub trees. This recursive procedure continues
until a particular query can be answered at the node at
which it is directed. The answer is then computed and
returned to the next higher level in the SPI tree. Once a
node has responses from all of its sub trees it can
compute its own response to its predecessor node. This
process terminates when the root node processes all the
responses from its sub trees. An SPI tree is constructed
by organizing the nodes of a Bayesian network into a
tree structure. The only constraint on the construction
process is that if there is an arc between two nodes in the
original network, then one of the nodes must be a direct
or indirect predecessor of the other in the SPI tree. This
constraint allows many possible SPI trees. The first step
in building a SPI tree is to choose the root node. This
done by computing the maximum node to node distance
for each node. The node that has the smallest maximum
distance is chosen as the root node. This heuristic is
designed to produce a. "bushy" SPI tree which can take
advantage of distributed processing. The second step is
to use maximum cardinality search to build the tree from
the root node. This step constructs the tree based on the
connectivity principle and guarantees satisfaction of the
tree construction constraint.
Fig: An Example Network

International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 4 Issue 9 Sep 2013
ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page 3025


Fig: SPI Tree

The above two figures shows the implementation of SPI
algorithm the network which is not defined in a proper
way can be classified into a network which will have
complete sense and functionality for the traversal.

PERFORMANCE

To evaluate the performance of the studied multicast
congestion control, we work on the following two
simulation models, and are mostly interested in
analyzing the transient behaviors of networks. With the
performance analysis report, the duration of response
time, retrieval rate of consumer and stable state of buffer
occupancy are the main concerns. From the view of
control theory, a control scheme with short response
time has the following advantages: when the buffer of
receiver nodes is close to the threshold, one may tell the
sending node to reduce the sending rate and prevent the
loss of packets as soon as possible; while when the
available bandwidth increases, the sending node
increases the sending rate as soon as possible and
enhances the utilization rate of the bandwidth. In
simulations, we process the nodes that have small
differences of time delay and sending rate. Later we
unify the time delay and rate of sending; because the
situation of every node in each group (about 20
receivers) is almost same, we choose only one node
from each group as a main node. We then assume that
the link delay is dominantly compared with other delays
like processing delay and queuing delay. Simulations are
carried out over a wide range of patterns, and
propagation between two different nodes can lie in the
LAN case or the WAN case. Based on different models
in the network and network continuous changing
behavior, we present simulated experiments. In
simulation 1 (see Fig. 3), the multicast source S1 sends
data packets at 0 ms and the multicast source S2 starts to
send data packets at 1000 ms in the simulation time;
then the joining of S2 enhances the network dynamic
nature, and demonstrates the efficiency of the SPID and
SPI schemes. In simulation 2 there are more receivers
and longer delay than in first model, and then set
appropriate parameters to enable system stability. In
each model, we compare and evaluate the performance
of the SPID and SPI systems



Fig. 3. Multicast simulation model 1.

TABLE I
PARAMETERS IN THE SIMULATION MODEL 1

Parameters Reciver1 Reciver21 Reciver41
xi(Mb) 70 80 120
Li(Mbps) 2 3 4
TRji(msec) 4 8 16


A. Simulation 1

In this simulation, we focus on comparing the transient
behavior of the SPID and SPI network systems based on
Fig. 3. The relevant notations and assumptions are listed
in Table I, and =16 ms, N =60, and n1 =n2 =n3 =
20. According to the aforementioned simulation
parameters and system stability analysis in Section IV to
select the control gains, one computes the relevant
control parameters based on Functions 1820 (for SPID
scheme) and Functions 2829 (for SPI scheme). For
SPID scheme, we set to be 1/20, which is stable in the
system. Then, a = 1/600, c = 1/400, and b =[b1, b2,
b3. . .b16] ,

For SPI scheme, we also set to be 1/19, which is stable
in the system. Then, a =1/380 and b =[b1, b2, b3. . .
b16 ],

In this section, the simulation results of simulation 1 are
Shown in Figs. 48. The sending rates of sources S1 and
S2 are shown in Figs. 45, respectively. The initial
sending rate of multicast source S1 is 6 Mb/s. It can be
seen that, although the sending rate of the multicast
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 4 Issue 9 Sep 2013
ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page 3026

source S1 has some fluctuation at first, as time goes on,
the sending rate is gradually adjusted and quickly at the
value of 2 Mb/s within 74.1 ms for SPID controller, and
325.4 ms for SPI controller. When the multicast source
S2 starts to send data packets at a rate of 1000 ms

Fig. 4 Sending rate of S1





Fig. 5 Sending rate of S2



Of source S1 has some fluctuation in response to the
multicast source S2 joins, and stabilizes at the latest
value of 1 megabytes per second within 287.5 ms for
SPID controller and 362.5 milliseconds for SPI
controller. Figs. 68 show the buffer transient responses
of the receiver node 1, node 21, and node 41,
respectively. In Fig. 6, these buffer occupancies of the
bottleneck receivers all have some fluctuation in the
beginning. Later gradually they become stable at the
value 27.5 megabytes for SPID controller and 230
megabytes for SPI controller. When the multicast source
S2 starts to send data packets at 1000 ms.


Fig. 6 Buffer occupancy of receiver 1








Fig. 7 Occupancy of receiver 21


The buffer occupancies of the receivers have some
fluctuation in response to the multicast joining with
source S2. For group1 which is receiving, they quickly
become stable at the value 240 Mb for SPID and 255
Mb for SPI. In Figs. 78, some packets get stored in the
buffer of receiver 21 and receiver 41 at the beginning.
As time goes on, the controller starts to adjust the
transmission rate of the source, and the remaining
packets in the buffer are cleared. Table II gives the
comparative analysis of the simulation model 1. The
second and fourth rows are about the stable sending
rates of sources S1 and S2 in time range [0, 2000] ms.
International Journal of Computer Trends and Technology (IJCTT) volume 4 Issue 9 Sep 2013
ISSN: 2231-2803 http://www.ijcttjournal.org Page 3027

the third and fifth rows are about the response times of
stable sending rates in the two different time ranges.

Fig. 8. Multicast system model 2



It is clear that our two schemes could quickly adjust the
buffer occupancy and the rates of sending node based on
the dynamic network environment. These simulation
results demonstrate our SPID and SPI controllers,
efficiency of system, faster response, less packet loss,
and more scalability. Based on these approaches, the
source adjusts the sending rate gradually to stabilize the
buffer occupancy and rate of sending node quickly.
Based on the earlier comparative analysis in Table II, we
find that SPID controllers can provide better
performance than SPI controllers in terms of the fast
response of the controlled sending rates and low buffer
occupancy of bottleneck receivers.

CONCLUSION

We have told that by implementing above
application called multi-input multi-output network
systems we can give assurance such as speed of
transmitting data, network traffic congestion, and
storage of data without reducing data in a packet format
by making each source or destination act as a
client/server. We have shown with the implementation
and moreover, we calculated time delay when data is
transferred from multiple inputs to multiple output
resources with this we can assure the data transferred
will reach destination with more efficiency and also
there will not be any loss of data in the transmission.





REFERENCES

N. X. Xiong, Y. He, L. T. Yang, and Y. Yang, A self-
tuning reliable dynamic scheme for multicast controlling
flow.

S. Dearing, Host extensions for IP multicast Stanford
University, Stanford, CA.

Shin and Zhang Analysis of feedback synchronization
signaling delay for multicasting flow control,

Siu Y, Suzuki H and Ren Performance of congestion
control algorithms in multicast ABR service

AUTHORS PROFILE




Satyavathi Gantala,
pursuing M.Tech(CSE) from
Vikas Group Of Institutions
(Formerly known as Mother
Theresa Educational Society
Group of Institutions),
Nunna, Vijayawada.
Affiliated to JNTU,
Kakinada, India


Boppudi Swanth,
Working as Assistant
Professor (CSE), Vikas Group
of Institutions (Formerly
Mother Teresa Educational
society Group of
Institutions), Nunna,
Vijayawada, Affiliated to
JNTU, Kakinada, India

Betam Suresh, is working
as an HOD, Department of
Computer science
Engineering at Vikas Group
of Institutions (Formerly
Mother Teresa Educational
society Group of
Institutions), Nunna,
Vijayawada, Affiliated to
JNTU, Kakinada, India