Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-04T09:49:51.011Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fixed point models of loss networks

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2009

F. P. Kelly
F. P. Kelly
Affiliation:
Statistical Laboratory, University of Cambridge, 16 Mill Lane, Cambridge CB2 1SB, England.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

In this paper we review a simple class of fixed point models for loss networks. We illustrate how these models can readily deal with heterogeneous call types and with simple dynamic routing strategies, and we outline some of the recent mathematical advances in the study of such models. We describe how fixed point models lead to a natural and tractable definition of the implied cost of carrying a call, and how this concept is related to issues of routing and capacity expansion in loss networks.

Type
Research Article
Information
The ANZIAM Journal , Volume 31 , Issue 2 , October 1989 , pp. 204 - 218
Copyright
Copyright © Australian Mathematical Society 1989

References

[1]Ackerley, R. G., “Hysteresis-type behaviour in networks with extensive overflow”, Br. Telecom Technol. J. 5 (1987).Google Scholar
[2]Burman, D. Y., Lehoczky, J. P. and Lim, Y., “Insensitivity of blocking probabilities in a circuit switching network”, J. Appl. Prob. 21 (1984) 850–859.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Cooper, R. B. and Katz, S. S., “Analysis of alternate routing networks account taken of the nonrandomness of overflow traffic”, Bell Laboratories (1964).Google Scholar
[4]Cope, G. A., “Data structures for descriptions of routing strategies in circuit-switched networks and efficient evaluation of implied costs”, Performance Engineering Division, British Telecom Research Laboratories (1988).Google Scholar
[5]Cope, G. A. and Kelly, F. P., “The use of implied costs for dimensioning and routing”, report prepared by Stochastic Networks Group, Cambridge, for British Telecom Research Laboratories (1986).Google Scholar
[6]Gibbens, R. J., Dynamic Routing in Circuit-switched Networks: the Dynamic Alternative Routing Strategy, Ph. D. thesis, University of Cambridge (1988).Google Scholar
[7]Gibbens, R. J., Hunt, P. J. and Kelly, F. P., “Bistability in communication networks”, Festschrift for J. M. Hammersley (to appear).Google Scholar
[8]Gibbens, R. J., Kelly, F. P. and Key, P. B., “Dynamic Alternative Routing—modelling and behaviour”, Proc. 12th Int. Teletraffic Cong., Turin (1988), Ed. Bonatti, M. (Elsevier, Amsterdam).Google Scholar
[9]Gibbens, R. J. and Whiting, P. A., “An investigation of the accuracy of implied cost methods for circuit-switched network optimization”, 5th UK Teletraffic Symposium, Aston (1988).Google Scholar
[10]Hunt, P. J., “Implied costs in loss networks”, Adv. Appl. Prob. 21 (1989) (to appear).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11]Hunt, P. J. and Kelly, F. P., “On critically loaded loss networks”, Adv. Appl. Prob. 21 (1989) (to appear).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12]Kelly, F. P., Reversibility and Stochastic Networks, (Wiley, Chichester, 1979).Google Scholar
[13]Kelly, F. P., “Blocking probabilities in large circuit-switched networks”, Adv. Appl. Probab. 18 (1986) 473–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[14]Kelly, F. P., “One-dimensional circuit-switched networks”, Ann. Prob. 15 (1987) 1166–1179.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15]Kelly, F. P., “Routing in circuit-switched networks: optimization, shadow prices and decentralization”, Adv. Appl. Prob. 20 (1988) 112–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16]Kelly, F. P., “Routing and capacity allocation in networks with trunk reservation” (submitted).Google Scholar
[17]Key, P. B., “Implied cost methodology and software tools for a fully connected network with DAR and trunk reservation”, Br. Telecom Technol. J. 6 (1988) 52–65.Google Scholar
[18]Key, P. B. and Whitehead, M. J., “Cost-effective use of networks employing Dynamic Alternative Routing”, Proc. 12th Int. Teletraffic Cong., Turin (1988), Ed. Bonatti, M. (Elsevier, Amsterdam).Google Scholar
[19]Krupp, R. S., “Stabilization of alternate routing networks”, IEEE International Communications Conference, Philadelphia (1982).Google Scholar
[20]Lin, P. M., Leon, B. J. and Stewart, C. R., “Analysis of circuit-switched networks employing originating-office control with spill-forward”, IEEE Trans. Comm. 26 (1978) 754–765.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[21]Nakagomi, Y. and Mori, H., “Flexible routing in the global communication network”, 7th International Teletraffic Congress (1973).Google Scholar
[22]Songhurst, D. J., “Protection against traffic overload in hierarchical networks employing alternative routing”, Telecommunications Networks Planning Symposium, Paris (1980).Google Scholar
[23]Stacey, R. R. and Songhurst, D. J., “Dynamic Alternative Routing in the British Telecom trunk network”, International Switching Symposium, Phoenix (1987).Google Scholar
[24]Whitt, W., “Blocking when service is required from several facilities simultaneously”, A. T. & T. Tech. J. 64 (1985) 1807–1856.Google Scholar
[25]Whittle, P., “Approximation in large-scale circuit-switched networks”, Prob. Eng. Inf. Sci. 2 (1988) 279–291.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[26]Wilkinson, R. I., “Theory for toll traffic engineering in the USA”, Bell Syst. Tech. J. 35 (1956) 421–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[27]Ziedins, I. B., “Quasi-stationary distributions and one-dimensional circuit-switched networks”, J. Appl. Prob. 24 (1987) 965–977.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[28]Ziedins, I. B. and Kelly, F. P., “Limit theorems for loss networks with diverse routing”, Adv. Appl. Prob. 21 (1989) (to appear).CrossRefGoogle Scholar