Spot the Difference

1. Weighted Round Robin

2. Drop tail queue

Both of them have the same:-

• Buffer size
• Output link bandwidth

However, the implementation still have some flaws. Still in progress...

XGraph

The above graph shows the throughput at CBR receivers. A total of six traffic generators and and six receiver was used for the simulation. Three out of six application managed to received with the average of 55kbps which has been buffered in queue that has higher weight. The other three receivers did not receive any packets since most of the packets are drop. The packets are drop at the queue which has lower weight. In addition, there is a bottleneck link between the transmitter and the receiver which cause the packets to queued up in the buffer before it is schedule to transmit. The graph was plotted using Xgraph 12.1.

Six plus six

A MIRAI-SF Animator showing a simulation scenario which consists of six packet generators and six packet receiver.

Wired Network

The above screenshots are MIRAI-SF animator simulating the wired network. I'm testing my source code within the wired network.Please observed the bottleneck link between rt2 and sw2. The blue bar represents the packet drops when the buffer is full.

No Transmission

I was trying to simulate packet transmission without using the wifi accees point in the FMIPv6 simulation to test Weighted round robin packet scheduler. The result was the mobile node did not receive any packets from the correspondent node. I suspect this got to with the softradio class which handle the switching between 3G node b and wifi access point.I found WRR packet scheduler only good for constant size packet.