T. Speakman, J. Crowcroft, J. Gemmell, D. Farinacci, S. Lin, D. Leshchiner, M. Luby, T. Montgomery, L. Rizzo, A. Tweedly, N. Bhaskar, R. Edmonstone, R. Sumanasekera, and L. Vicisano, "PGM Reliable Transport Protocol Specification," IETF, RFC 3208, Dec. 2001. Home/Search Document Not in Database Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
First 50 documents Next 50
Fairness Evaluation Experiments for Multicast Congestion.. - Karim Seada Ahmed (2001) (Correct)
....called the acker because it is the receiver that sends the ACKs. Other receivers can send NACKs when they lose packets, if a reliable transport protocol is used . pgmcc In [16] the authors state that pgmcc can be used with both has been used to implement congestion control in the PGM protocol [17]. A sample scenario for pgmcc is shown in Figure 1. The acker is the representative of the group. It is chosen as the receiver with the worst throughput to ensure that the protocol will be TCP friendly. A window based TCP like controller based on positive ACKs is run between the sender and the ....
T. Speakman, D. Farinacci, J. Crowcroft, J. Gemmell, S. Lin, A. Tweedly, D. Leshchiner, M. Luby, N. Bhaskar, R. Edmonstone, K. M. Johnson, T. Montgomery, L. Rizzo, R. Sumanasekera, and L. Vicisano. PGM Reliable Transport Protocol Specification. Internet-Draft, draft-speakman-pgmspec -05.txt, 24 November 2000.
Systematic Evaluation of Multicast Congestion Control Protocols - Seada, Gupta, Helmy (2002) (Correct)
....a tight control loop is run between it and the sender. It is called the acker because it is the receiver that sends the ACKs. Other receivers can send NACKs when they lose packets, if a reliable transport protocol is used . pgmcc has been used to implement congestion control in the PGM protocol [18]. The acker is the representative of the group. It is chosen as the receiver with the worst throughput to ensure that the protocol will be TCP friendly. A window based TCP like controller based on In [16] the authors state that pgmcc can be used with both reliable and non reliable transport ....
T. Speakman, D. Farinacci, J. Crowcroft, J. Gemmell, S. Lin, A. Tweedly, D. Leshchiner, M. Luby, N. Bhaskar, R. Edmonstone, K. M. Johnson, T. Montgomery, L. Rizzo, R. Sumanasekera, and L. Vicisano. "PGM Reliable Transport Protocol Specification." InternetDraft, draft-speakman-pgm-spec-05.txt, 24 November 2000.
Large-Scale Newscast Computing on the Internet - Jelasity, van Steen (2002) (6 citations) (Correct)
....of the underlying hardware. Such facilities are not available in the Internet, generally rendering the original solution useless. Again, special measures need to be taken to adopt the original solution without too many changes. For example, the design of PGM, a scalable reliable multicast protocol [3], has been strongly motivated by the need to support local area publish subscribe solutions that deploy multicasting. A main advantage that multicast based solutions have over client server solutions is their often inherent decentralized nature. This makes these solutions particularly attractive ....
T. Speakman, J. Crowcroft, J. Gemmell, D. Farinacci, S. Lin, D. Leshchiner, M. Luby, T. Montgomery, L. Rizzo, A. Tweedly, N. Bhaskar, R. Edmonstone, R. Sumanasekera, and L. Vicisano, "PGM reliable transport protocol specification," RFC 3208, Dec. 2001. 21
A Framework for Incremental Deployment Strategies for.. - He, Papadopoulos (2003) (1 citation) (Correct)
.... for their network and application; b) what is the minimum level of deployment such that the benefits justify the cost; and (c) how many routers need to be deployed before we begin to experience diminishing returns We have selected two reliable multicast router assist schemes, namely PGM [1] and LMS [2] because their specification includes detailed incremental deployment methods. Note that in this study we are not evaluating the merits of router assistance nor carry out a comparative evaluation of these protocols. Such studies have been done elsewhere [1] 2] 3] We are simply ....
....schemes, namely PGM [1] and LMS [2] because their specification includes detailed incremental deployment methods. Note that in this study we are not evaluating the merits of router assistance nor carry out a comparative evaluation of these protocols. Such studies have been done elsewhere [1], 2] 3] We are simply interested in how performance of these protocols changes with deployment. Our study helps understand the general behavior of routerassisted protocols under partial deployment and the specific issues faced by each protocol. PGM and LMS differ significantly in their ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
T. Speakman, J. Crowcroft, J. Gemmell, D. Farinacci, S. Lin, D. Leshchiner, M. Luby, T. L. Montgomery, L. Rizzo, A. Tweedly, N. Bhaskar, R. Edmonstone, R. Sumanasekera, and L. Vicisano, "PGM Reliable Transport Protocol Specification," Request For Comments (RFC) 3208, December 2001, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3208.txt?number=3208.
An Extensible RTCP Control Framework for Large Multimedia .. - Chesterfield, Schooler (2003) (2 citations) (Correct)
.... that extends RTCP to facilitate network monitoring [11] and to establish packet loss resiliency schemes for small group sessions [16] The hierarchical summarisation scheme discussed in Section 4 is directly related to the concepts of NACK aggregation for reliable multicast services such as PGM [22] and LSM [17] all of which are improved when they have routerlevel aggregation assistance from utilities such as Generic Router Assist [5, 23] Additionally, application level overlay solutions exist that are applicable within our context and that assist with the issue of efficient aggregator ....
T. Speakman, J. Crowcroft, J. Gemmell, D. Farinacci, S. Lin, D. Leshchiner, M. Luby, T. Montgomery, L. Rizzo, A. Tweedly, N. Bhaskar, R. Edmonstone, R. Sumanasekera, and L. Vicisano. PGM reliable transport protocol specification. RFC 3208, Internet Engineering Task Force, Dec. 2001.
An Analysis Of A Router-Based Loss Detection Service For.. - Maimour, Pham (2001) (Correct)
....instead of ACKs. However they still suffer from the NACK implosion problem when a large number of receivers have subscribed to the multicast session. In receiver initiated protocols with local recovery, the retransmission of a lost packet can be performed by some other nodes in the multicast tree [2, 10, 14, 9, 11, 3]. Recently, the use of active network concepts [12] where routers themselves could contribute to enhance the network services by customized functionalities has been proposed in the multicast research community. Contributing mainly on feedback implosion problems, retransmission scoping and cache ....
T. Speakman et al. Pgm reliable transport protocol specification. internet draft, 1998.
Hierarchical Reliable Multicast: Performance Evaluation.. - Guha, Markopoulou.. (1 citation) (Correct)
....study (ii) performance evaluation work related to the first problem and (iii) optimization algorithms for location problems, related to the second problem we are studying. As discussed in section III, there are many applications [9] 29] and transport protocols [16] 7] 6] 15] 28] 3] [23], 21] that follow the model of hierarchical reliable multicast by using local error recovery combined with hierarchy. They address performance evaluation by means of simulation and they place their proxies using heuristics. Our work is of analytical nature and can be used for the assessment of ....
....designated receivers or DRs in RMTP and OTERS, log servers in LBRM, group controllers in LGMP, domain managers in TMTP or proxies in RMX. Proxies may be members of the group (in LGMP, RMTP, OTERS) or special servers (in LBRM, RMX) they may be co located with the routers, assisted by them (in PGM [23], OTERS, LMS [21] or at a higher layer. subgroup. All members send feedback back to the proxy, in some way ignored in this model. If all members of the subgroup have received the packet at least once, then the proxy multicasts the next data packet. If one or more members of the subgroup lost the ....
T. Speakman, J. Crowcroft, J. Gemmell, D.Farinacci, S.Lin, D.Leshchiner, M.Luby, T.Montgomery, L.Rizzo, A.Tweedly, N. Bhaskar, R.Edmonstone, R.Sumanasekera, L. Visicano, "PGM Reliable Transport Protocol Specification ", IETF RFC 3208, Dec. 2001.
Light-Weight Multicast Services (LMS): A Router-Assisted.. - Papadopoulos, Varghese (2004) (Correct)
No context found.
T. Speakman, J. Crowcroft, J. Gemmell, D. Farinacci, S. Lin, D. Leshchiner, M. Luby, T. Montgomery, L. Rizzo, A. Tweedly, N. Bhaskar, R. Edmonstone, R. Sumanasekera, and L. Vicisano, "PGM Reliable Transport Protocol Specification," IETF, RFC 3208, Dec. 2001.
The Breadcrumb Forwarding Service and the Digital Fountain.. - Yano, McCanne (1999) (Correct)
No context found.
T. Speakman, D. Farinacci, S. Lin, and A. Tweedly, "PGM Reliable Transport Protocol Specification," Aug. 1998, Internet Draft (Work in Progress).
Dynamic Replier Active Reliable Multicast (DyRAM) - Maimour And Pham (2002) (Correct)
No context found.
T. Speakman et al. Pgm reliable transport protocol specification. internet draft, 1998.
An Analysis Of A Router-Based Loss Detection Service For.. - Reliable Multicast.. (Correct)
No context found.
T. Speakman et al. Pgm reliable transport protocol specification. internet draft, 1998.
A Loss Detection Service for Active Reliable Multicast Protocols - Maimour And Pham (2002) (Correct)
No context found.
Speakman, T. et al. (1998). Pgm reliable transport protocol specification. internet draft.
DyRAM: an Active Reliable Multicast Framework for Data.. - Maimour, Pham (1997) (Correct)
No context found.
T. Speakman, J. Crowcroft, J. Gemmell, D. Farinacci, S. Lin, D. Leshchiner, M. Luby, T. Montgomery, L. Rizzo, A. Tweedlyand N. Bhaskar, R. Edmonstone, R. Sumanasekera, and L. Vicisano. Pgm reliable transport protocol specification. RFC 3208, IETF, December 2001. Appeared also in IEEE Networks Magazine, Special issue on "Multicasting: An Enabling Technology, 2003. 21
AMCA: an Active-based Multicast Congestion Avoidance Algorithm - Maimour And Pham (2003) (Correct)
No context found.
T. Speakman et al. PGM reliable transport protocol specification. internet draft, 1998.
A publish/subscribe CORBA Persistent State Service Prototype - Liebig, Cilia, Betz.. (2000) (Correct)
No context found.
T. Speakman, D. Farinacci, S. Lin and A. Tweedly. PGM Reliable Transport Protocol Specification. Internet Draft , Cisco Systems, August 1998.
MAF : un Protocole de Multicast Fiable - Prom Eth Ee (2003) (Correct)
No context found.
SPEAKMAN T., CROWCROFT J., GEMMELL J., FARINACCI D., LIN S., LESHCHINER D., LUBY M., MONTGOMERY T., RIZZO L., TWEEDLY A., BHASKAR N., EDMONSTONE R., SUMANASEKERA R.VICISANO L., PGM Reliable Transport Protocol Specification, RFC 3208, 2001.
Sender-Initiated Multicast for small group communications - Visoottiviseth (2003) (Correct)
No context found.
T. Speakman, J. Crowcroft, J. Gemmell, D. Farinacci, S. Lin, D. Leshchiner, M. Luby, T. Montgomery, L. Rizzo, A. Tweedly, N. Bhaskar, R. Edmonstone, R. Sumanasekera, and L. Vicisano. PGM Reliable Transport Protocol Specification, December 2001. RFC 3208.
Multicast Congestion Control with Distrusted Receivers - Gorinsky, Jain, Vin (2002) (1 citation) (Correct)
No context found.
T. Speakman, J. Crowcroft, J. Gemmell, D. Farinacci, S. Lin, D. Leshchiner, M. Luby, T. Montgomery, L. Rizzo, A. Tweedly, N. Bhaskar, R. Edmonstone, R. Sumanasekera, and L. Vicisano. PGM Reliable Transport Protocol Specification. RFC 3208, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3208.txt, December 2001.
Fairness Evaluation Experiments for Multicast Congestion.. - Karim Seada Ahmed (2002) (Correct)
No context found.
T. Speakman, J. Crowcroft, J. Gemmell, D. Farinacci, S. Lin, D. Leshchiner, M. Luby, T. Montgomery, L. Rizzo, A. Tweedly, N. Bhaskar, R. Edmonstone, R. Sumanasekera, and L. Vicisano. "PGM Reliable Transport Protocol Specification." RFC 3208, December 2001.
A Framework for Systematic Evaluation of Multicast.. - Karim Seada Ahmed (Correct)
No context found.
T. Speakman, J. Crowcroft, J. Gemmell, D. Farinacci, S. Lin, D. Leshchiner, M. Luby, T. Montgomery, L. Rizzo, A. Tweedly, N. Bhaskar, R. Edmonstone, R. Sumanasekera, and L. Vicisano. "PGM Reliable Transport Protocol Specification." RFC 3208, December 2001.
A publish/subscribe CORBA Persistent State Service Prototype - Liebig, Cilia, Betz.. (2000) (Correct)
No context found.
T. Speakman, D. Farinacci, S. Lin and A. Tweedly. PGM Reliable Transport Protocol Specification. Internet Draft <draft-speakman-pgm-spec-02.txt>, Cisco Systems, August 1998.
Systematic Evaluation of Multicast Congestion Control Protocols - Karim Seada Sandeep (2002) (Correct)
No context found.
T. Speakman, D. Farinacci, J. Crowcroft, J. Gemmell, S. Lin, A. Tweedly, D. Leshchiner, M. Luby, N. Bhaskar, R. Edmonstone, K. M. Johnson, T. Montgomery, L. Rizzo, R. Sumanasekera, and L. Vicisano. "PGM Reliable Transport Protocol Specification." InternetDraft, draft-speakman-pgm-spec-05.txt, 24 November 2000.
Systematic Evaluation of Multicast Congestion Control Protocols - Karim Seada Sandeep (2002) (Correct)
No context found.
T. Speakman, D. Farinacci, J. Crowcroft, J. Gemmell, S. Lin, A. Tweedly, D. Leshchiner, M. Luby, N. Bhaskar, R. Edmonstone, K. M. Johnson, T. Montgomery, L. Rizzo, R. Sumanasekera, and L. Vicisano. PGM Reliable Transport Protocol Specification. Internet-Draft, draft-speakman-pgm-spec-05.txt, 24 November 2000.
Fairness Evaluation Experiments for Multicast Congestion.. - Karim Seada Ahmed (2001) (Correct)
No context found.
T. Speakman, J. Crowcroft, J. Gemmell, D. Farinacci, S. Lin, D. Leshchiner, M. Luby, T. Montgomery, L. Rizzo, A. Tweedly, N. Bhaskar, R. Edmonstone, R. Sumanasekera, and L. Vicisano. "PGM Reliable Transport Protocol Specification." RFC 3208, December 2001.
MCA: A Rate-based End-to-end Multicast Congestion Avoidance.. - Li, Kalyanaraman (2002) (Correct)
No context found.
T. Speakman et al, "PGM reliable transport protocol specification," Internet Draft, March '00.
First 50 documents Next 50
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC