US 6,076,112 AGrant

Prioritized Access to Shared Buffers

Issue Date:2000-06-13

•32 Claims

•23 Drawing Sheets

Abstract

In a link-level flow controlled system, a method and apparatus providing the ability to partition a buffer resource among multiple prioritized buffer subsets through definition of at least one threshold, the buffer resource being shared by a plurality of connections. Different category of service levels, in terms of delay bounds, are thus enabled. The presently disclosed link-level flow controlled system provides for zero cell loss. The shared buffer resource is divided among N priority pools, defined by N-1 threshold levels, each priority pool attributable to a respective category of service. Link-level counters and registers, disposed in a transmit element, as well as an indication of priority level associated with each connection, are employed in realizing the shared buffer resource.

Metadata

Assignees

Fujitsu Network Communications, Inc.
Fujitsu Limited

Inventors

Stephen A. Hauser
Stephen A. Caldara
Thomas A. Manning

Application Information

Application Number:US 2654407

Filing Date:1999-03-09

Priority Date:1996-07-18

Art Unit:271

Classifications

IPC:

G06F 1300

Field of Search:

709710230-23552-57

Patent Drawings (23 sheets)

Description

Field of the Invention

This application relates to communications methods and apparatus in a distributed switching architecture, and in particular to methods and apparatus for prioritized access to shared buffer resources in a flow controlled virtual connection.

Background of the Invention

A Flow Controlled Virtual Connection (FCVC) protocol for use in a distributed switching architecture is presently known in the art, and is discussed below with reference to FIG. 1. This protocol involves communication of status (buffer allocation and current state) on a per virtual connection, such as a virtual channel connection or a virtual path connection, basis between upstream and downstream network elements to provide a "no cell loss" guarantee. A cell is the unit of data to be transmitted. Each cell requires a buffer to store it.

Presently known flow control mechanisms further provide for the application of connection-level flow control among a plurality of connections, each having equivalent access to a shared buffer pool in the receiver. No distinction in buffer allocation is made within a service category, regardless of time-sensitivity of one or more of the data cell sequences.

Summary of the Invention

In a link-level flow controlled system, the ability to partition a buffer resource among multiple prioritized buffer subsets through definition of at least one threshold is provided, the buffer resource for sharing by a plurality of connections. Different categories of service levels in terms of delay bounds are thus enabled. The link-level flow controlled system according to the present invention provides for zero cell loss by the throttling of cell flow from a transmitter element to a receiver element based upon link-level counters and registers maintained within the transmitter element updated by feedback information from the receiver element. A link can be defined either as a physical link or as a logical grouping comprised of logical connections.

Access to the partitioned buffer subsets is based upon the priority assigned to each subset and a priority associated with each connection having cells to be buffered. Buffer subsets are defined by the at least one threshold, which in one embodiment is dynamically adjustable.

Link-level counters and registers found in the transmitter element maintain threshold levels and track buffer pool usage in the receiver element for controlling cell traffic from the transmitter element to the receiver element. As with link-level flow control, feedback is provided from the receiver element reflective of the current status of the shared buffer resource.

Brief Description of the Drawings

The above and further advantages may be more fully understood by referring to the following description and accompanying drawings of which:

FIG. 1 is a block diagram of a connection-level flow control apparatus as known in the prior art;

FIG. 2 is a block diagram of a link-level flow control apparatus according to the present invention;

FIGS. 3A and 3B are flow diagram representations of counter initialization and preparation for cell transmission within a flow control method according to the present invention;

FIG. 4 is a flow diagram representation of cell transmission within the flow control method according to the present invention;

FIGS. 5A and 5B are flow diagram representations of update cell preparation and transmission within the flow control method according to the present invention;

FIGS. 6A and 6B are flow diagram representations of an alternative embodiment of the update cell preparation and transmission of FIGS. 5A and 5B;

FIGS. 7A and 7B are flow diagram representations of update cell reception within the flow control method according to the present invention;

FIGS. 8A, 8B and 8C are flow diagram representations of check cell preparation, transmission and reception within the flow control method according to the present invention;

FIGS. 9A, 9B and 9C are flow diagram representations of an alternative embodiment of the check cell preparation, transmission and reception of FIGS. 8A, 8B and 8C;

FIG. 10 illustrates a cell buffer pool according to the present invention as viewed from an upstream element;

FIG. 11 is a block diagram of a link-level flow control apparatus in an upstream element providing prioritized access to a shared buffer resource in a downstream element according to the present invention;

FIGS. 12A and 12B are flow diagram representations of counter initialization and preparation for cell transmission within a prioritized access method according to the present invention;

FIGS. 13A and 13B illustrate alternative embodiments of cell buffer pools according to the present invention as viewed from an upstream element;

FIG. 14 is a block diagram of a flow control apparatus in an upstream element providing guaranteed minimum bandwidth and prioritized access to a shared buffer resource in a downstream element according to the present invention;

FIGS. 15A and 15B are flow diagram representations of counter initialization and preparation for cell transmission within a guaranteed minimum bandwidth mechanism employing prioritized access according to the present invention;

FIG. 16 is a block diagram representation of a transmitter, a data link, and a receiver in which the presently disclosed joint flow control mechanism is implemented; and

FIG. 17 illustrates data structures associated with queues in the receiver of FIG. 16.

Detailed Description

In FIG. 1, the resources required for connection-level flow control are presented. As previously stated, the illustrated configuration of FIG. 1 is presently known in the art. However, a brief discussion of a connection-level flow control arrangement will facilitate an explanation of the presently disclosed link-level flow control method and apparatus.

One link 10 is shown providing an interface between an upstream transmitter element 12, also known as an UP subsystem, and a downstream receiver element 14, also known as a DP subsystem. Each element 12, 14 can act as a switch between other network elements. For instance, the upstream element 12 in FIG. 1 can receive data from a PC (not shown). This data is communicated through the link 10 to the downstream element 14, which in turn can forward the data to a device such as a printer (not shown) Alternatively, the illustrated network elements 12, 14 can themselves be network end-nodes.

The essential function of the presently described arrangement is the transfer of data cells from the upstream element 12 via a connection 20 in the link 10 to the downstream element 14, where the data cells are temporarily held in cell buffers 28. Cell format is known, and is further described in "Quantum Flow Control", Version 1.5.1, dated Jun. 27, 1995 and subsequently published in a later version by the Flow Control Consortium. In FIG. 1, the block labelled Cell Buffers 28 represents a set of cell buffers dedicated to the respective connection 20. Data cells are released from the buffers 28, either through forwarding to another link beyond the downstream element 14, or through cell utilization within the downstream element 14. The latter event can include the construction of data frames from the individual data cells if the downstream element 14 is an end-node such as a work station.

Each of the upstream and downstream elements 12, 14 are controlled by respective processors, labelled UP (Upstream Processor) 16 and DP (Downstream Processor) 18. Associated with each of the processors 16, 18 are sets of buffer counters for implementing the connection-level flow control. These buffer counters are each implemented as an increasing counter/limit register set to facilitate resource usage changes. The counters of FIG. 1, described in further detail below, are implemented in a first embodiment in UP internal RAM. The counter names discussed and illustrated for the prior art utilize some of the same counter names as used with respect to the presently disclosed flow control method and apparatus. This is merely to indicate the presence of a similar function or element in the prior art with respect to counters, registers, or like elements now disclosed.

Within the link 10, which in a first embodiment is a copper conductor, multiple virtual connections 20 are provided. In an alternative embodiment, the link 10 is a logical grouping of plural virtual connections 20. The number of connections 20 implemented within the link 10 depends upon the needs of the respective network elements 12, 14, as well as the required bandwidth per connection. In FIG. 1, only one connection 20 and associated counters are is illustrated for simplicity.

First, with respect to the upstream element 12 of FIG. 1, two buffer state controls are provided, BS.sub.-- Counter 22 and BS.sub.-- Limit 24. In a first embodiment, each are implemented as fourteen bit counters/registers, allowing a connection to have 16,383 buffers. This number would support, for example, 139 Mbps, 10,000 kilometer round-trip service. The buffer state counters 22, 24 are employed only if the connection 20 in question is flow-control enabled. That is, a bit in a respective connection descriptor, or queue descriptor, of the UP 16 is set indicating the connection 20 is flow-control enabled.

BS.sub.-- Counter 22 is incremented by the UP 16 each time a data cell is transferred out of the upstream element 12 and through the associated connection 20. Periodically, as described below, this counter 22 is adjusted during an update event based upon information received from the downstream element 14. BS.sub.-- Counter 22 thus presents an indication of the number of data cells either currently being transmitted in the connection 20 between the upstream and downstream elements 12, 14, or yet unreleased from buffers 28 in the downstream element 14.

BS.sub.-- Limit 24 is set at connection configuration time to reflect the number of buffers 28 available within the receiver 14 for this connection 20. For instance, if BS.sub.-- Counter 22 for this connection 20 indicates that twenty data cells have been transmitted and BS.sub.-- Limit 24 indicates that this connection 20 is limited to twenty receiver buffers 28, the UP 16 will inhibit further transmission from the upstream element 12 until an indication is received from the downstream element 14 that further buffer space 28 is available for that connection 20.

Tx.sub.-- Counter 26 is used to count the total number of data cells transmitted by the UP 16 through this connection 20. In the first embodiment, this is a twenty-eight bit counter which rolls over at 0xFFFFFFF. As described later, Tx.sub.-- Counter 16 is used during a check event to account for errored cells for this connection 20.

In the downstream element 14, the DP 18 also manages a set of counters for each connection 20. Buffer.sub.-- Limit 30 performs a policing function in the downstream element 14 to protect against misbehaving transmitters. Specifically, the buffer.sub.-- limit register 30 indicates the maximum number of cell buffers 28 in the receiver 14 which this connection 20 can use. In most cases, BS.sub.-- Limit 24 is equal to Buffer.sub.-- Limit 30. At some point, though, it may be necessary to adjust the maximum number of cell buffers 28 for this connection 20 up or down. This function is coordinated by network management software. To avoid the "dropping" of data cells in transmission, an increase in buffers per connection is reflected first in Buffer.sub.-- Limit 30 prior to BS.sub.-- Limit 24. Conversely, a reduction in the number of receiver buffers per connection is reflected first in BS.sub.-- Limit 24 and thereafter in Buffer.sub.-- Limit 30.

Buffer.sub.-- Counter 32 provides an indication of the number of buffers 28 in the downstream element 14 which are currently being used for the storage of data cells. As described subsequently, this value is used in providing the upstream element 12 with a more accurate picture of buffer availability in the downstream element 14. Both the Buffer.sub.-- Limit 30 and Buffer.sub.-- Counter 32 are fourteen bits wide in the first embodiment.

N2.sub.-- Limit 34 determines the frequency of connection flow-rate communication to the upstream transmitter 12. A cell containing such flow-rate information is sent upstream every time the receiver element 14 forwards a number of cells equal to N2.sub.-- Limit 34 out of the receiver element 14. This updating activity is further described subsequently. In the first embodiment, N2.sub.-- Limit 34 is six bits wide.

The DP 18 uses N2.sub.-- Counter 36 to keep track of the number of cells which have been forwarded out of the receiver element 14 since the last time the N2.sub.-- Limit 34 was reached. In the first embodiment, N2.sub.-- Counter 36 is six bits wide.

In a first embodiment, the DP 18 maintains Fwd.sub.-- Counter 38 to maintain a running count of the total number of cells forwarded through the receiver element 14. This includes buffers released when data cells are utilized for data frame construction in an end-node. When the maximum count for this counter 38 is reached, the counter rolls over to zero and continues. The total number of cells received by the receiver element 14 can be derived by adding Buffer.sub.-- Counter 32 to Fwd.sub.-- Counter 38. The latter is employed in correcting the transmitter element 12 for errored cells during the is check event, as described below. Fwd.sub.-- Counter 38 is twenty-eight bits wide in the first embodiment.

In a second embodiment, the DP 18 maintains Rx.sub.-- Counter 40, a counter which is incremented each time the downstream element 14 receives a data cell through the respective connection 20. The value of this counter 40 is then usable directly in response to check cells and in the generation of an update cell, both of which will be described further below. Similar to the Fwd.sub.-- Counter 38, Rx.sub.-- Counter 40 is twenty-eight bits wide in this second embodiment.

There are two events in addition to a steady state condition in the connection-level flow controlled protocol: update; and check. In steady state, data cells are transmitted from the transmitter element 12 to the receiver element 14. In update, buffer occupancy information is returned upstream by the receiver element 14 to correct counter values in the transmitter element 12. Check mode is used to check for cells lost or injected due to transmission errors between the upstream transmitter and downstream receiver elements 12, 14.

In the accompanying figures, connection level counters are augmented with "[i]" to indicate association with one connection [i] of plural possible connections.

Prior to any activity, counters in the upstream and downstream elements 12, 14 are initialized, as illustrated in FIG. 3A. Initialization includes zeroing counters, and providing initial values to limit registers such as Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit and Link.sub.-- Buffer.sub.-- Limit. In FIG. 3A, Buffer.sub.-- Limit[i] is shown being initialized to (RTT*BW)+N2, which represents the round-trip time times the virtual connection bandwidth, plus accommodation for delays in processing the update cell. As for Link.sub.-- N2.sub.-- Limit, "X" represents the buffer state update frequency for the link, and for N2.sub.-- Limit[i], "Y" represents the buffer state update frequency for each connection.

In steady state operation, the UP 16 of the transmitter element 12 determines which virtual connection 20 (VC) has a non-zero cell count (i.e. has a cell ready to transmit), a BS.sub.-- Counter value less than the BS.sub.-- Limit, and an indication that the VC is next to send (also in FIGS. 3A and 3B).

The UP 16 increments BS.sub.-- Counter 22 and Tx.sub.-- Counter 26 whenever the UP 16 transmits a data cell over the respective connection 20, assuming flow control is enabled (FIG. 4). Upon receipt of the data cell, the DP 18 checks whether Buffer.sub.-- Counter 32 equals or exceeds Buffer.sub.-- Limit 30, which would be an indication that there are no buffers available for receipt of the data cell. If Buffer.sub.-- Counter>=Buffer.sub.-- Limit, the data cell is discarded (FIG. 3B). Otherwise, the DP 18 increments Buffer.sub.-- Counter 32 and Rx.sub.-- Counter 40 and the data cell is deposited in a buffer cell 28, as in FIG. 4. The Tx.sub.-- Counter 26 and the Rx.sub.-- Counter 40 roll over when they reach their maximum.

If flow control is not enabled, none of the presently described functionality is implemented. Connections that do not utilize flow control on the link can coexist with connections using link flow control. The flow control accounting is not employed when cells from non-flow controlled connections are transmitted and received. This includes both connection level accounting and link level accounting. Thereby, flow control and non-flow control connections can be active simultaneously.

When a data cell is forwarded out of the receiver element 14, Buffer.sub.-- Counter 32 is decremented. Buffer.sub.-- Counter 32 should never exceed Buffer.sub.-- Limit 30 when the connection-level flow control protocol is enabled, with the exception of when BS.sub.-- Limit 24 has been decreased and the receiver element 14 has yet to forward sufficient cells to bring Buffer.sub.-- Counter 32 below Buffer.sub.-- Limit 30.

A buffer state update occurs when the receiver element 14 has forwarded a number of data cells equal to N2.sub.-- Limit 34 out of the receiver element 14. In the first embodiment in which the DP 18 maintains Fwd.sub.-- Counter 38, update involves the transfer of the value Fwd.sub.-- Counter 38 from the receiver element 14 back to the transmitter element 12 in an update cell, as in FIG. 6A. In the embodiment employing Rx.sub.-- Counter 40 in the downstream element 14, the value of Rx.sub.-- Counter 40 minus Buffer.sub.-- Counter 32 is conveyed in the update cell, as in FIG. 5A. At the transmitter 12, the update cell is used to update the value in BS.sub.-- Counter 22, as shown for the two embodiments in FIG. 7A. Since BS.sub.-- Counter 22 is independent of buffer allocation information, buffer allocation can be changed without impacting the performance of this aspect of connection-level flow control.

Update cells require an allocated bandwidth to ensure a bounded delay. This delay needs to be accounted for, as a component of round-trip time, to determine the buffer allocation for the respective connection.

The amount of bandwidth allocated to the update cells is a function of a counter, Max.sub.-- Update.sub.-- Counter (not illustrated) at an associated downstream transmitter element (not illustrated). This counter forces the scheduling of update and check cells, the latter to be discussed subsequently. There is a corresponding Min.sub.-- Update.sub.-- Interval counter (not shown) in the downstream transmitter element, which controls the space between update cells. Normal cell packing is seven records per cell, and Min.sub.-- Update.sub.-- Interval is similarly set to seven. Since the UP 16 can only process one update record per cell time, back-to-back, fully packed update cells received at the UP 16 would cause some records to be dropped.

An update event occurs as follows, with regard to FIGS. 1, 5A and 6A. When the downstream element 14 forwards (releases) a cell, Buffer.sub.-- Counter 32 is decremented and N2.sub.-- Counter 36 and Fwd.sub.-- Counter 38 are incremented. When the N2.sub.-- Counter 36 is equal to N2.sub.-- Limit 34, the DP 18 prepares an update cell for transmission back to the upstream element 12 and N2.sub.-- Counter 36 is set to zero. The upstream element 12 receives a connection indicator from the downstream element 14 forwarded cell to identify which connection 20 is to be updated. In the first embodiment, the DP 18 causes the Fwd.sub.-- Counter 38 value to be inserted into an update record payload (FIG. 6A). In the second embodiment, the DP 18 causes the Rx.sub.-- Counter 40 value minus the Buffer.sub.-- Counter 32 value to be inserted into the update record payload (Fig. 5A). When an update cell is fully packed with records, or as the minimum bandwidth pacing interval is reached, the update cell is transmitted to the upstream element 12.

Once received upstream, the UP 16 receives the connection indicator from the update record to identify the transmitter connection, and extracts the Fwd.sub.-- Counter 38 value or the Rx.sub.-- Counter 40 minus Buffer.sub.-- Counter 32 value from the update record. BS.sub.-- Counter 22 is reset to the value of Tx.sub.-- Counter 26 minus the update record value (FIG. 7A). If this connection was disabled from transmitting due to BS.sub.-- Counter 22 being equal to or greater than BS.sub.-- Limit 24, this condition should now be reversed, and if so the connection should again be enabled for transmitting.

In summary, the update event provides the transmitting element 12 with an indication of how many cells originally transmitted by it have now been released from buffers within the receiving element 14, and thus provides the transmitting element 12 with a more accurate indication of receiver element 14 buffer 28 availability for that connection 20.

The buffer state check event serves two purposes: 1) it provides a mechanism to calculate and compensate for cell loss or cell insertion due to transmission errors; and 2) it provides a mechanism to start (or restart) a flow if update cells were lost or if enough data cells were lost that N2.sub.-- Limit 34 is never reached.

One timer (not shown) in the UP subsystem 16 serves all connections. The connections are enabled or disabled on a per connection basis as to whether to send check cells from the upstream transmitter element 12 to the downstream receiver element 14. The check process in the transmitter element 12 involves searching all of the connection descriptors to find one which is check enabled (see FIGS. 8A, 9A). Once a minimum pacing interval has elapsed (the check interval), the check cell is forwarded to the receiver element 14 and the next check enabled connection is identified. The spacing between check cells for the same connection is a function of the number of active flow-controlled connections times the mandated spacing between check cells for all connections. Check cells have priority over update cells.

The check event occurs as follows, with regard to FIGS. 8A through 8C and 9A through 9C. Each transmit element 12 connection 20 is checked after a timed check interval is reached. If the connection is flow-control enabled and the connection is valid, then a check event is scheduled for transmission to the receiver element 14. A buffer state check cell is generated using the Tx.sub.-- Counter 26 value for that connection 20 in the check cell payload, and is transmitted using the connection indicator from the respective connection descriptor (FIGS. 8A and 9A).

In the first embodiment, a calculation of errored cells is made at the receiver element 14 by summing Fwd.sub.-- Counter 38 with Buffer.sub.-- Counter 32, and subtracting this value from the contents of the transmitted check cell record, the value of Tx.sub.-- Counter 26 (FIG. 9B). The value of Fwd.sub.-- Counter 38 is increased by the errored cell count. An update record with the new value for Fwd.sub.-- Counter 38 is then generated. This updated Fwd.sub.-- Counter 38 value subsequently updates the BS.sub.-- Counter 22 value in the transmitter element 12.

In the second embodiment, illustrated in FIG. 8B, the same is accomplished by resetting the Rx.sub.-- Counter 40 value equal to the check cell payload value (Tx.sub.-- Counter 26). A subsequent update record is established using the difference between the values of Rx.sub.-- Counter 40 and Buffer.sub.-- Counter 32.

Thus, the check event enables accounting for cells transmitted by the transmitter element 12, through the connection 20, but either dropped or not received by the receiver element 14.

A "no cell loss" guarantee is enabled using buffer state accounting at the connection level since the transmitter element 12 has an up-to-date account of the number of buffers 28 in the receiver element 14 available for receipt of data cells, and has an indication of when data cell transmission should be ceased due to the absence of available buffers 28 downstream.

In order to augment the foregoing protocol with a receiver element buffer sharing mechanism, link-level flow control, also known as link-level buffer state accounting, is added to connection-level flow control. It is possible for such link-level flow control to be implemented without connection-level flow control. However, a combination of the two is preferable since without connection-level flow control there would be no restriction on the number of buffers a single connection might consume.

It is desirable to perform buffer state accounting at the link level, in addition to the connection level, for the following reasons. Link-level flow control enables cell buffer sharing at a receiver element while maintaining the "no cell loss" guarantee afforded by connection-level flow control. Buffer sharing results in the most efficient use of a limited number of buffers. Rather than provide a number of buffers equal to bandwidth times RTT for each connection, a smaller number of buffers is employable in the receiver element 14 since not all connections require a full compliment of buffers at any one time.

A further benefit of link-level buffer state accounting is that each connection is provided with an accurate representation of downstream buffer availability without necessitating increased reverse bandwidth for each connection. A high-frequency link-level update does not significantly effect overall per-connection bandwidth.

Link-level flow control is described now with regard to FIG. 2. Like elements found in FIG. 1 are given the same reference numbers in FIG. 2, with the addition of a prime. Once again, only one virtual connection 20' is illustrated in the link 10', though the link 10' would normally host multiple virtual connections 20'. Once again, the link 10' is a physical link in a first embodiment, and a logical grouping of plural virtual connections in a second embodiment.

The upstream transmitter element 12' (FSPP subsystem) partially includes a processor labelled From Switch Port Processor (FSPP) 16'. The FSPP processor 16' is provided with two buffer state counters, BS.sub.-- Counter 22' and BS.sub.-- Limit 24', and a Tx.sub.-- Counter 26' each having the same function on a per-connection basis as those described with respect to FIG. 1.

The embodiment of FIG. 2 further includes a set of resources added to the upstream and downstream elements 12', 14' which enable link-level buffer accounting. These resources provide similar functions as those utilized on a per-connection basis, yet they operate on the link level.

For instance, Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 50 tracks all cells in flight between the FSPP 16' and elements downstream of the receiver element 14', including cells in transit between the transmitter 12' and the receiver 14' and cells stored within receiver 14' buffers 28'. As with the update event described above with respect to connection-level buffer accounting, Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 50 is modified during a link update event by subtracting either the Link.sub.-- Fwd.sub.-- Counter 68 value or the difference between Link-Rx-Counter 70 and Link-Buffer.sub.-- Counter 62 from the Link.sub.-- TX.sub.-- Counter 54 value. In a first embodiment, the link-level counters are implemented in external RAM associated with the FSPP processor 16'.

Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit 52 limits the number of shared downstream cell buffers 28' in the receiver element 14' to be shared among all of the flow-control enabled connections 20'. In a first embodiment, Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 50 and Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit 52 are both twenty bits wide.

Link.sub.-- TX.sub.-- Counter 54 tracks all cells transmitted onto the link 10'. It is used during the link-level update event to calculate a new value for Link.sub.-- BS-Counter 50. Link.sub.-- TX.sub.-- Counter 54 is twenty-eight bits wide in the first embodiment.

In the downstream element 14', To Switch Port Processor (TSPP) 18' also manages a set of counters for each link 10' in the same fashion with respect to the commonly illustrated counters in FIGS. 1 and 2. The TSPP 18' further includes a Link.sub.-- Buffer.sub.-- Limit 60 which performs a function in the downstream element 14' similar to Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit 52 in the upstream element 12' by indicating the maximum number of cell buffers 28' in the receiver 14' available for use by all connections 10'. In most cases, Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit 52 is equal to Link.sub.-- Buffer.sub.-- Limit 60. The effect of adjusting the number of buffers 28' available up or down on a link-wide basis is the same as that described above with respect to adjusting the number of buffers 28 available for a particular connection 20. Link.sub.-- Buffer.sub.-- Limit 60 is twenty bits wide in the first embodiment.

Link.sub.-- Buffer.sub.-- Counter 62 provides an indication of the number of buffers in the downstream element 14' which are currently being used by all connections for the storage of data cells. This value is used in a check event to correct the Link.sub.-- Fwd.sub.-- Counter 68 (described subsequently). The Link.sub.-- Buffer.sub.-- Counter 62 is twenty bits wide in the first embodiment.

Link.sub.-- N2.sub.-- Limit 64 and Link.sub.-- N2.sub.-- Counter 66, each eight bits wide in the first embodiment, are used to generate link update records, which are intermixed with connection-level update records. Link N2.sub.-- Limit 64 establishes a threshold number for triggering the generation of a link-level update record (FIGS. 5B and 6B), and Link.sub.-- N2.sub.-- Counter 66 and Link Fwd.sub.-- Counter 68 are incremented each time a cell is released out of a buffer cell in the receiver element 14'. In a first embodiment, N2.sub.-- Limit 34' and Link N2.sub.-- Limit 64 are both static once initially configured.

However, in a further embodiment of the present invention, each is dynamically adjustable based upon measured bandwidth. For instance, if forward link bandwidth is relatively high, Link N2.sub.-- Limit 64 could be adjusted down to cause more frequent link-level update record transmission. Any forward bandwidth impact would be considered minimal. Lower forward bandwidth would enable the raising of Link N2.sub.-- Limit 64 since the unknown availability of buffers 28' in the downstream element 14' is less critical.

Link.sub.-- Fwd.sub.-- Counter 68 tracks all cells released from buffer cells 28' in the receiver element 14' that came from the link 10' in question. It is twenty-eight bits wide in a first embodiment, and is used in the update event to recalculate Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 50.

Link.sub.-- Rx.sub.-- Counter 70 is employed in an alternative embodiment in which Link.sub.-- Fwd.sub.-- Counter 68 is not employed. It is also twenty-eight bits wide in an illustrative embodiment and tracks the number of cells received across all connections 20' in the link 10'.

With regard to FIGS. 2 et seq., a receiver element buffer sharing method is described. Normal data transfer by the FSPP 16' in the upstream element 12' to the TSPP 18' in the downstream element 14' is enabled across all connections 20' in the link 10' as long as the Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 50 is less than or equal to Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit 52, as in FIG. 3B. This test prevents the FSPP 16' from transmitting more data cells than it believes are available in the downstream element 14'. The accuracy of this belief is maintained through the update and check events, described next.

A data cell is received at the downstream element 14' if neither connection-level or link-level buffer limit are exceeded (FIG. 3B). If a limit is exceeded, the cell is discarded.

The update event at the link level involves the generation of a link update record when the value in Link.sub.-- N2.sub.-- Counter 66 reaches (equals or exceeds) the value in Link.sub.-- N2.sub.-- Limit 64, as shown in FIGS. 5B and 6B. In a first embodiment, Link.sub.-- N2.sub.-- Limit 64 is set to forty.

The link update record, the value taken from Link.sub.-- Fwd.sub.-- Counter 68 in the embodiment of FIG. 6B, is mixed with the per-connection update records (the value of Fwd.sub.-- Counter 38') in update cells transferred to the FSPP 16'. In the embodiment of FIG. 5B, the value of Link.sub.-- Rx.sub.-- Counter 70 minus Link.sub.-- Buffer.sub.-- Counter 62 is mixed with the per-connection update records. When the upstream element 12' receives the update cell having the link update record, it sets the Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 50 equal to the value of Link.sub.-- Tx.sub.-- Counter 54 minus the value in the update record (FIG. 7B). Thus, Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 50 in the upstream element 12' is reset to reflect the number of data cells transmitted by the upstream element 12', but not yet released in the downstream element 14'.

The actual implementation of the transfer of an update record, in a first embodiment, recognizes that for each TSPP subsystem 14', there is an associated FSPP processor (not illustrated), and for each FSPP subsystem 12', there is also an associated TSPP processor (not illustrated). Thus, when an update record is ready to be transmitted by the TSPP subsystem 14' back to the upstream FSPP subsystem 12', the TSPP 18' conveys the update record to the associated FSPP (not illustrated), which constructs an update cell. The cell is conveyed from the associated FSPP to the TSPP (not illustrated) associated with the upstream FSPP subsystem 12'. The associated TSPP strips out the update record from the received update cell, and conveys the record to the upstream FSPP subsystem 12'.

The check event at the link level involves the transmission of a check cell having the Link.sub.-- Tx.sub.-- Counter 54 value by the FSPP 16' every "W" check cells (FIGS. 8A and 9A). In a first embodiment, W is equal to four. At the receiver element 14', the TSPP 18' performs the previously described check functions at the connection-level, as well as increasing the Link.sub.-- Fwd.sub.-- Counter 68 value by an amount equal to the check record contents, Link.sub.-- Tx.sub.-- Counter 54, minus the sum of Link.sub.-- Buffer.sub.-- Counter 62 plus Link.sub.-- Fwd.sub.-- Counter 68 in the embodiment of FIG. 9C. In the embodiment of FIG. 8C, Link.sub.-- Rx.sub.-- Counter 70 is modified to equal the contents of the check record (Link.sub.-- Tx.sub.-- Counter 54). This is an accounting for errored cells on a link-wide basis. An update record is then generated having a value taken from the updated Link Fwd.sub.-- Counter 68 or Link.sub.-- Rx.sub.-- Counter 70 values (FIGS. 8C and 9C)

It is necessary to perform the check event at the link level in addition to the connection level in order to readjust the Link.sub.-- Fwd.sub.-- Counter 68 value (FIG. 9C) or Link Rx.sub.-- Counter 70 value (FIG. 8C) quickly in the case of large transient link failures.

Again with regard to FIG. 2, the following are exemplary initial values for the illustrated counters in an embodiment having 100 connections in one link.

The BS.sub.-- Limit value equals the Buffer.sub.-- Limit value for both the connections and the link. Though BS.sub.-- Limit 24' and Buffer-Limit 30' are both equal to twenty, and there are 100 connections in this link, there are only 1000 buffers 28' in the downstream element, as reflected by Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit 52 and Link.sub.-- Buffer.sub.-- Limit 60. This is because of the buffer pool sharing enabled by link-level feedback.

Link-level flow control can be disabled, should the need arise, by not incrementing: Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter; Link.sub.-- N2.sub.-- Counter; and Link.sub.-- Buffer.sub.-- Counter, and by disabling link-level check cell transfer. No updates will occur under these conditions.

The presently described invention can be further augmented with a dynamic buffer allocation scheme, such as previously described with respect to N2.sub.-- Limit 34 and Link.sub.-- N2.sub.-- Limit 64. This scheme includes the ability to dynamically adjust limiting parameters such as BS.sub.-- Limit 24, Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit 52, Buffer.sub.-- Limit 30, and Link.sub.-- Buffer.sub.-- Limit 60, in addition to N2.sub.-- Limit 34 and Link.sub.-- N2.sub.-- Limit 64. Such adjustment is in response to measured characteristics of the individual connections or the entire link in one embodiment, and is established according to a determined priority scheme in another embodiment. Dynamic buffer allocation thus provides the ability to prioritize one or more connections or links given a limited buffer resource.

The Link N2.sub.-- Limit is set according to the desired accuracy of buffer accounting. On a link-wide basis, as the number of connections within the link increases, it may be desirable to decrease Link.sub.-- N2.sub.-- Limit in light of an increased number of connections in the link, since accurate buffer accounting allows greater buffer sharing among many connections. Conversely, if the number of connections within the link decreases, Link.sub.-- N2.sub.-- Limit may be increased, since the criticality of sharing limited resources among a relatively small number of connections is decreased.

In addition to adjusting the limits on a per-link basis, it may also be desirable to adjust limits on a per-connection basis in order to change the maximum sustained bandwidth for the connection.

The presently disclosed dynamic allocation schemes are implemented during link operation, based upon previously prescribed performance goals.

In a first embodiment of the present invention, incrementing logic for all counters is disposed within the FSPP processor 16'. Related thereto, the counters previously described as being reset to zero and counting up to a limit can be implemented in a further embodiment as starting at the limit and counting down to zero. The transmitter and receiver processors interpret the limits as starting points for the respective counters, and decrement upon detection of the appropriate event. For instance, if Buffer.sub.-- Counter (or Link.sub.-- Buffer.sub.-- Counter) is implemented as a decrementing counter, each time a data cell is allocated to a buffer within the receiver, the counter would decrement. When a data cell is released from the respective buffer, the counter would increment. In this manner, the counter reaching zero would serve as an indication that all available buffers have been allocated. Such implementation is less easily employed in a dynamic bandwidth allocation scheme since dynamic adjustment of the limits must be accounted for in the non-zero counts.

A further enhancement of the foregoing zero cell loss, link-level flow control technique includes providing a plurality of shared cell buffers 28" in a downstream element 14" wherein the cell buffers 28" are divided into N prioritized cell buffer subsets, Priority 0 108a, Priority 1 108b, Priority 2 108c, and Priority 3 108d, by N-1 threshold level(s), Threshold(1) 102, Threshold(2) 104, and Threshold(3) 106. Such a cell buffer pool 28" is illustrated in FIG. 10, in which four priorities labelled Priority 0 through Priority 3 are illustrated as being defined by three thresholds labelled Threshold(1) through Threshold(3).

This prioritized buffer pool enables the transmission of high priority connections while lower priority connections are "starved" or prevented from transmitting cells downstream during periods of link congestion. Cell priorities are identified on a per-connection basis. The policy by which the thresholds are established is defined according to a predicted model of cell traffic in a first embodiment, or, in an alternative embodiment, is dynamically adjusted. Such dynamic adjustment may be in response to observed cell traffic at an upstream transmitting element, or according to empirical cell traffic data as observed at the prioritized buffer pool in the downstream element. For example, in an embodiment employing dynamic threshold adjustment, it may be advantageous to lower the number of buffers available to data cells having a priority less than Priority 0, or conversely to increase the number of buffers above Threshold(3), if a significantly larger quantity of Priority 0 traffic is detected.

The cell buffer pool 28" depicted in FIG. 10 is taken from the vantage point of a modified version 12" of the foregoing link-level flow control upstream element 12', the pool 28" being resident within a corresponding downstream element 14". This modified upstream element 12", viewed in FIG. 11, has at least one Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Threshold(n) 100, 102, 104 established in association with a Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 50" and Link BS.sub.-- Limit 52", as described above, for characterizing a cell buffer pool 28" in a downstream element 14". These Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Thresholds 102, 104, 106 define a number of cell buffers in the pool 28" which are allocatable to cells of a given priority, wherein the priority is identified by a register 108 associated with the BS.sub.-- Counter 22" counter and BS.sub.-- Limit 24" register for each connection 20". The Priorities 108a, 108b, 108c, 108d illustrated in FIG. 11 are identified as Priority 0 through Priority 3, Priority 0 being the highest. When there is no congestion, as reflected by Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 50" being less than Link.sub.-- BS Threshold(1) 102 in FIGS. 10 and 11, flow-controlled connections of any priority can transmit. As congestion occurs, as indicated by an increasing value in the Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 50", lower priority connections are denied access to downstream buffers, in effect disabling their transmission of cells. In the case of severe congestion, only cells of the highest priority are allowed to transmit. For instance, with respect again to FIG. 10, only cells of Priority 0 108a are enabled for transmission from the upstream element 12" to the downstream element 14" if the link-level Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Threshold(3) 106 has been reached downstream. Thus, higher priority connections are less effected by the state of the network because they have first access to the shared downstream buffer pool. Note, however, that connection-level flow control can still prevent a high-priority connection from transmitting, if the path that connection is intended for is severely congested.

As above, Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 50" is periodically updated based upon a value contained within a link-level update record transmitted from the downstream element 14" to the upstream element 12". This periodic updating is required in order to ensure accurate function of the prioritized buffer access of the present invention. In an embodiment of the present invention in which the Threshold levels 102, 104, 106 are modified dynamically, either as a result of tracking the priority associated with cells received at the upstream transmitter element or based upon observed buffer usage in the downstream receiver element, it is necessary for the FSPP 16" to have an accurate record of the state of the cell buffers 28", as afforded by the update function.

The multiple priority levels enable different categories of service, in terms of delay bounds, to be offered within a single quality of service. Within each quality of service, highest priority to shared buffers is typically given to connection/network management traffic, as identified by the cell header. Second highest priority is given to low bandwidth, small burst connections, and third highest for bursty traffic. With prioritization allocated as described, congestion within any one of the service categories will not prevent connection/management traffic from having the lowest cell delay.

Initialization of the upstream element 12" as depicted in FIG. 11 is illustrated in FIG. 12A. Essentially, the same counters and registers are set as viewed in FIG. 3A for an upstream element 12' not enabling prioritized access to a shared buffer resource, with the exception that Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Threshold 102, 104, 106 values are initialized to a respective buffer value T. As discussed, these threshold buffer values can be pre-established and static, or can be adjusted dynamically based upon empirical buffer usage data.

FIG. 12B represents many of the same tests employed prior to forwarding a cell from the upstream element 12" to the downstream element 14" as shown in FIG. 3B, with the exception that an additional test is added for the provision of prioritized access to a shared buffer resource. Specifically, the FSPP 16" uses the priority value 108 associated with a cell to be transferred to determine a threshold value 102, 104, 106 above which the cell cannot be transferred to the downstream element 14". Then, a test is made to determine whether the Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 50" value is greater than or equal to the appropriate threshold value 102, 104, 106. If so, the data cell is not transmitted. Otherwise, the cell is transmitted and connection-level congestion tests are executed, ti as previously described.

In alternative embodiments, more or less than four priorities can be implemented with the appropriate number of thresholds, wherein the fewest number of priorities is two, and the corresponding fewest number of thresholds is one. For every N priorities, there are N-1 thresholds.

In yet a further embodiment, flow-control is provided solely at the link level, and not at the connection level, though it is still necessary for each connection to provide some form of priority indication akin to the priority field 108 illustrated in FIG. 11.

The link level flow controlled protocol as previously described can be further augmented in yet another embodiment to enable a guaranteed minimum cell rate on a per-connection basis with zero cell loss. This minimum cell rate is also referred to as guaranteed bandwidth. The connection can be flow-controlled below this minimum, allocated rate, but only by the receiver elements associated with this connection. Therefore, the minimum rate of one connection is not affected by congestion within other connections.

It is a requirement of the presently disclosed mechanism that cells present at the upstream element associated with the FSPP 116 be identified by whether they are to be transmitted from the upstream element using allocated bandwidth, or whether they are to be transmitted using dynamic bandwidth. For instance, the cells may be provided in queues associated with a list labelled "preferred," indicative of cells requiring allocated bandwidth. Similarly, the cells may be provided in queues associated with a list labelled "dynamic," indicative of cells requiring dynamic bandwidth.

In a frame relay setting, the present mechanism is used to monitor and limit both dynamic and allocated bandwidth. In a setting involving purely internet traffic, only the dynamic portions of the mechanism may be of significance. In a setting involving purely CBR flow, only the allocated portions of the mechanism would be employed. Thus, the presently disclosed method and apparatus enables the maximized use of mixed scheduling connections--those requiring all allocated bandwidth to those requiring all dynamic bandwidth, and connections therebetween.

In the present mechanism, a downstream cell buffer pool 128, akin to the pool 28' of FIG. 2, is logically divided between an allocated portion 300 and a dynamic portion 301, whereby cells identified as to receive allocated bandwidth are buffered within this allocated portion 300, and cells identified as to receive dynamic bandwidth are buffered in the dynamic portion 301. FIG. 13A shows the two portions 300, 301 as distinct entities; the allocated portion is not a physically distinct block of memory, but represents a number of individual cell buffers, located anywhere in the pool 128.

In a further embodiment, the presently disclosed mechanism for guaranteeing minimum bandwidth is applicable to a mechanism providing prioritized access to downstream buffers., as previously described in conjunction with FIGS. 10 and 11. With regard to FIG. 13B, a downstream buffer pool 228 is logically divided among an allocated portion 302 and a dynamic portion 208, the latter logically subdivided by threshold levels 202, 204, 206 into prioritized cell buffer subsets 208a-d. As with FIG. 13A, the division of the buffer pool 228 is a logical, not physical, division.

Elements required to implement this guaranteed minimum bandwidth mechanism are illustrated in FIG. 14, where like elements from FIGS. 2 and 11 are provided with like reference numbers, added to 100 or 200. Note that no new elements have been added to the downstream element; the presently described guaranteed minimum bandwidth mechanism is transparent to the downstream element.

New aspects of flow control are found at both the connection and link levels. With respect first to the connection level additions and modifications, D.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 122 highlights resource consumption by tracking the number of cells scheduled using dynamic bandwidth transmitted downstream to the receiver 114. This counter has essentially the same function as BS.sub.-- Counter 22' found in FIG. 2, where there was no differentiation between allocated and dynamically scheduled cell traffic. Similarly, D.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit 124, used to provide a ceiling on the number of downstream buffers available to store cells from the transmitter 112, finds a corresponding function in BS.sub.-- Limit 24' of FIG. 2. As discussed previously with respect to link level flow control, the dynamic bandwidth can be statistically shared; the actual number of buffers available for dynamic cell traffic can be over-allocated. The amount of "D" buffers provided to a connection is equal to the RTT times the dynamic bandwidth plus N2. RTT includes delays incurred in processing the update cell.

A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 222 and A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit 224 also track and limit, respectively, the number of cells a connection can transmit by comparing a transmitted number with a limit on buffers available. However, these values apply strictly to allocated cells; allocated cells are those identified as requiring allocated bandwidth (the guaranteed minimum bandwidth) for transmission. Limit information is set up at connection initialization time and can be raised and lowered as the guaranteed minimum bandwidth is changed. If a connection does not have an allocated component, the A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit 224 will be zero. The A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 222 and A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit 224 are in addition to the D.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 122 and D.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit 124 described above. The amount of "A" buffers dedicated to a connection is equal to the RTT times the allocated bandwidth plus N2. The actual number of buffers dedicated to allocated traffic cannot be over-allocated. This ensures that congestion on other connections does not impact the guaranteed minimum bandwidth.

A connection loses, or runs out of, its allocated bandwidth through the associated upstream switch once it has enqueued a cell but has no more "A" buffers as reflected by A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 222 and A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit 224. If a connection is flow controlled below its allocated rate, it loses a portion of its allocated bandwidth in the switch until the congestion condition is alleviated. Such may be the case in multipoint-to-point (M2P) switching, where plural sources on the same connection, all having a minimum guaranteed rate, converge on a single egress point which is less than the sum of the source rates. In an embodiment of the presently disclosed mechanism in which the transmitter element is a portion of a switch having complimentary switch flow control, the condition of not having further "A" buffer states inhibits the intra-switch transmission of further allocated cell traffic for that connection.

The per-connection buffer return policy is to return buffers to the allocated pool first, until the A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 222 equals zero. Then buffers are returned to the dynamic pool, decreasing D.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 122.

Tx.sub.-- Counter 126 and Priority 208 are provided as described above with respect to connection-level flow control and prioritized access.

On the link level, the following elements are added to enable guaranteed minimum cell rate on a per-connection basis. Link A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 250 is added to the FSPP 116. It tracks all cells identified as requiring allocated bandwidth that are "in-flight" between the FSPP 116 and the downstream switch fabric, including cells in the TSPP 118 cell buffers 128, 228. The counter 250 is decreased by the same amount as the A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 222 for each connection when a connection level update function occurs (discussed subsequently).

Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit 152 reflects the total number of buffers available to dynamic cells only, and does not include allocated buffers. Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 150, however, reflects a total number of allocated and dynamic cells transmitted. Thus, connections are not able to use their dynamic bandwidth when Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 150 (all cells in-flight, buffered, or in downstream switch fabric) minus Link.sub.-- A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 250 (all allocated cells transmitted) is greater than Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit 152 (the maximum number of dynamic buffers available). This is necessary to ensure that congestion does not impact the allocated bandwidth. The sum of all individual A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit 224 values, or the total per-connection allocated cell buffer space 300, 302, is in one embodiment less than the actually dedicated allocated cell buffer space in order to account for the potential effect of stale (i.e., low frequency) connection-level updates.

Update and check events are also implemented in the presently disclosed allocated/dynamic flow control mechanism. The downstream element 114 transmits connection level update cells when either a preferred list and a VBR-priority 0 list are empty and an update queue is fully packed, or when a "max.sub.-- update.sub.-- interval" (not illustrated) has been reached.

At the upstream end 112, the update cell is analyzed to identify the appropriate queue, the FSPP 116 adjusts the A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 222 and D.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 122 for that queue, returning cell buffers to "A" first then "D", as described above, since the FSPP 116 cannot distinguish between allocated and dynamic buffers. The number of "A" buffers returned to individual connections is subtracted from Link.sub.-- A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 250.

Other link level elements used in association with the presently disclosed minimum guaranteed bandwidth mechanism, such as Link.sub.-- Tx.sub.-- Counter 154, function as described in the foregoing discussion of link level flow control. Also, as previously noted, a further embodiment of the presently described mechanism functions with a link level flow control scenario incorporating prioritized access to the downstream buffer resource 228 through the use of thresholds 202, 204, 206. The function of these elements are as described in the foregoing.

The following is an example of a typical initialization in a flow controlled link according to the present disclosure:

If D.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter>=D.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit, then the queue is prevented from indicating that it has a cell ready to transmit. In the embodiment referred to above in which the upstream element is a switch having composite bandwidth, this occurs by the queue being removed from the dynamic list, preventing the queue from being scheduled for transmit using dynamic bandwidth.

For allocated cells, a check is made when each cell is enqueued to determine whether the cell, plus other enqueued cells, plus A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter, is a number greater than A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit. If not, the cell is enqueued and the queue is placed on the preferred list. Else, the connection is prevented from transmitting further cells through the upstream element 112 switch fabric.

Initialization of the upstream element 112 as depicted in FIG. 14 is illustrated in FIG. 15A. Essentially, the same counters and registers set in FIG. 3A for an upstream element 12' (when prioritized access to a shared buffer resource is not enabled), and in FIG. 12A for an upstream element 12" (when prioritized access is enabled). Exceptions include: Link.sub.-- A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter 250 initialized to zero; connection-level allocated and dynamic BS.sub.-- Counters 122, 222 set to zero; and connection-level allocated and dynamic BS.sub.-- Limits 124, 224 set to respective values of N.sub.A and N.sub.B. Similarly, on the downstream end at the connection level, the allocated and dynamic Buffer.sub.-- Limits and Buffer.sub.-- counters are set, with the Buffer.sub.-- Limits employing a bandwidth value for the respective traffic type (i.e., BW.sub.A =allocated cell bandwidth and BW.sub.D =dynamic cell bandwidth). Further, each cell to be transmitted is identified as either requiring allocated or dynamic bandwidth as the cell is received from the switch fabric.

FIG. 15B represents many of the same tests employed prior to forwarding a cell from the upstream element 112 to the downstream element 114 as shown in FIGS. 3B and 12B, with the following exceptions. Over-allocation of buffer states on a link-wide basis is checked for dynamic traffic only and is calculated by subtracting Link.sub.-- A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter from Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter and comparing the result to Link.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit. Over-allocation on a per-connection basis is calculated by comparing D.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter with D.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit; programming or other failures are checked on a per-connection basis by comparing A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Counter with A.sub.-- BS.sub.-- Limit. Similarly, over-allocation at the downstream element is tested for both allocated and dynamic traffic at the connection level. As previously indicated, the presently disclosed mechanism for providing guaranteed minimum bandwidth can be utilized with or without the prioritized access mechanism, though aspects of the latter are illustrated in FIGS. 15A and 15B for completeness.

As discussed, connection-level flow control as known in the art relies upon discrete control of each individual connection. In particular, between network elements such as a transmitting element and a receiving element, the control is from transmitter queue to receiver queue. Thus, even in the situation illustrated in FIG. 16 in which a single queue Q.sub.A in a transmitter element is the source of data cells for four queues Q.sub.W, Q.sub.X, Q.sub.Y, and Q.sub.Z associated with a single receiver processor, the prior art does not define any mechanism to handle this situation.

In FIG. 16, the transmitter element 10 is an FSPP element having a FSPP 11 associated therewith, and the receiver element 12 is a TSPP element having a TSPP 13 associated therewith. The FSPP 11 and TSPP 13 as employed in FIG. 16 selectively provide the same programmable capabilities as described above, such as link-level flow control, prioritized access to a shared, downstream buffer resource, and guaranteed minimum cell rate on a connection level, in addition to a connection-level flow control mechanism. Whether one or more of these enhanced capabilities are employed in conjunction with the connection-level flow control is at the option of the system configurator.

Yet another capability provided by the FSPP and TSPP according to the present disclosure is the ability to treat a group of receiver queues jointly for purposes of connection-level flow control. In FIG. 16, instead of utilizing four parallel connections, the presently disclosed mechanism utilizes one connection 16 in a link 14, terminating in four separate queues Q.sub.W, Q.sub.X, Q.sub.Y, and Q.sub.Z, though the four queues are treated essentially as a single, joint entity for purposes of connection-level flow control. This is needed because some network elements need to use a flow controlled service but cannot handle the bandwidth of processing update cells when N2 is set to a low value, 10 or less (see above for a discussion of the update event in connection-level flow control). Setting N2 to a large value, such as 30, for a large number of connections requires large amounts of downstream buffering because of buffer orphaning, where buffers are not in-use but are accounted for up-stream as in-use because of the lower frequency of update events. This mechanism is also useful to terminate Virtual Channel Connections (VCC) within a Virtual Path Connection (VPC), where flow control is applied to the VPC.

This ability to group receiver queues is a result of manipulations of the queue descriptor associated with each of the receiver queues Q.sub.W, Q.sub.X, Q.sub.Y, and Q.sub.Z. With reference to FIG. 17, queue descriptors for the queues in the receiver are illustrated. Specifically, the descriptors for queues Q.sub.W, Q.sub.X, and Q.sub.Y are provided on the left, and in general have the same characteristics. One of the first fields pertinent to the present disclosure is a bit labelled "J." When set, this bit indicates that the associated queue is being treated as part of a joint connection in a receiver. Instead of maintaining all connection-level flow control information in each queue descriptor for each queue in the group, certain flow control elements are maintained only in one of the queue descriptors for the group. In the illustrated case, that one queue is queue Q.sub.Z.

In each of the descriptors for queues Q.sub.W, Q.sub.X, and Q.sub.Y, a "Joint Number" field provides an offset or pointer to a set of flow control elements in the descriptor for queue Q.sub.Z. This pointer field may provide another function when the "J" bit is not set. While Buffer.sub.-- Limit (labelled "Buff.sub.-- Limit" in FIG. 17) and N2.sub.-- Limit are maintained locally within each respective descriptor, Joint.sub.-- Buffer.sub.-- Counter (labelled "Jt.sub.-- Buff.sub.-- Cntr"), Joint.sub.-- N2.sub.-- Counter (labelled "Jt.sub.-- N2.sub.-- Cntr"), and Joint.sub.-- Forward.sub.-- Counter (labelled "Jt.sub.-- Fwd.sub.-- Cntr") are maintained in the descriptor for queue Q.sub.Z for all of the queues in the group. The same counters in the descriptors for queues Q.sub.W, Q.sub.X, and Q.sub.Y go unused. The joint counters perform the same function as the individual counters, such as those illustrated in FIG. 2 at the connection level, but are advanced or decremented as appropriate by actions taken in association with the individual queues. Thus, for example, Joint.sub.-- Buffer.sub.-- Counter is updated whenever a buffer cell receives a data cell or releases a data cell in association with any of the group queues. The same applies to Joint.sub.-- N2.sub.-- Counter and Joint.sub.-- Forward.sub.-- Counter. In an alternate embodiment of the previously described flow control mechanism, each Forward.sub.-- Counter is replaced with Receive.sub.-- Counter. Similarly, in an alternative embodiment of the presently disclosed mechanism, Joint .sub.-- Forward.sub.-- Counter is replaced with Joint.sub.-- Receive.sub.-- Counter, depending upon which is maintained in each of the group queues. Only the embodiment including Forward.sub.-- Counter and Joint .sub.-- Forward.sub.-- Counter are illustrated.

Not all of the per-queue descriptor elements are superseded by functions in a common descriptor. Buffer.sub.-- Limit (labelled "Buff.sub.-- Limit" in FIG. 17) is set and referred to on a per-queue basis. Thus, Joint.sub.-- Buffer.sub.-- Counter is compared against the Buffer.sub.-- Limit of a respective queue. Optionally, the Buffer.sub.-- Limit could be Joint.sub.-- Buffer.sub.-- Limit, instead of maintaining individual, common limits. The policy is to set the same Buffer.sub.-- Limit in all the TSPP queues associated with a single Joint.sub.-- Buffer.sub.-- Counter.

An update event is triggered, as previously described, when the Joint.sub.-- N2.sub.-- Counter reaches the queue-level N2.sub.-- Limit. The policy is to set all of the N2.sub.-- Limits equal to the same value for all the queues associated with a single joint flow control connection.

When a check cell is received for a connection, an effort to modify the Receive.sub.-- Counter associated with the receiving queue results in a modification of the Joint.sub.-- Receive.sub.-- Counter. Thus, the level of indirection provided by the Joint.sub.-- Number is applicable to both data cells and check cells.

At the transmitter element 10, only one set of upstream flow control elements are maintained. At connection set-up time, the joint connection is set-up as a single, point-to-point connection, as far as the upstream elements are concerned. Therefore, instead of maintaining four sets of upstream elements for the embodiment of FIG. 16, the presently disclosed mechanism only requires one set of elements (Tx.sub.-- Counter, BS.sub.-- Counter, BS.sub.-- Limit, all having the functionality as previously described).

Once a joint flow control entity has been established, other TSPP queues for additional connections may be added. To do so, each new queue must have the same N2.sub.-- Limit and Buffer.sub.-- Limit values. The queues for the additional connections will reference the common Joint.sub.-- N2.sub.-- Counter and either Joint.sub.-- Forward.sub.-- Counter or Joint.sub.-- Receive.sub.-- Counter.

As previously noted, when J=1, the Joint.sub.-- Number field is used as an offset to the group descriptor. The Joint.sub.-- Number for the group descriptor is set to itself, as shown in FIG. 17 with regard to the descriptor for queue Q.sub.Z. This is also the case in point-to-point connections (VCC to VCC rather than the VPC to VCC, as illustrated in FIG. 16), where each Joint.sub.-- Number points to its own descriptor. Implementation for each of point-to-point and the presently described point-to-multipoint connections is thus simplified.

Having described preferred embodiments of the invention, it will be apparent to those skilled in the art that other embodiments incorporating the concepts may be used. These and other examples of the invention illustrated above are intended by way of example and the actual scope of the invention is to be determined from the following claims.

Claims

What is claimed is:

1. A method for providing prioritized access to a shared buffer resource in a receiving apparatus by data cells transmitted over a link to said receiving apparatus by a sending apparatus, said method comprising the steps of: determining a priority level of a data cell to be transmitted; generating a first count indicative of a number of data cells transmitted to said receiving apparatus over said link for storage in said shared buffer resource; storing at least one buffer threshold providing a maximum number of buffers allocatable to data cells of a respective priority level; identifying which, if any, of said at least one buffer thresholds are equaled or exceeded by said first count; and disabling transmission of said data cell to be transmitted if one of said at least one buffer threshold corresponding to said priority level of said data cell to be transmitted is equaled or exceeded by said first count.

2. The method according to claim 1, wherein said step of determining a priority level further comprises determining said priority level of said data cell to be transmitted based upon a connection of said data cell.

3. The method according to claim 1, wherein N-1 buffer thresholds are stored for every N priority levels determined.

4. The method according to claim 1, further comprising the step of modifying said first count as data cells are transmitted by said sending apparatus to said receiving apparatus over said link.

5. The method according to claim 1, wherein said step of modifying said first count further comprises modifying said first count in accordance with a value identifying the number of buffers allocated to data cells within said shared buffer resource.

6. The method according to claim 1, wherein said step of storing at least one buffer threshold further comprises dynamically adjusting said at least one buffer threshold according to an empirical analysis of data cells to be transmitted by said sending apparatus.

7. The method according to claim 6, wherein said step of dynamically adjusting said at least one buffer threshold further comprises dynamically adjusting said at least one buffer threshold according to an empirical analysis of priorities of data cells to be transmitted by said sending apparatus.

8. The method according to claim 1, wherein said step of storing at least one buffer threshold further comprises dynamically adjusting said at least one buffer threshold according to an empirical analysis of utilization of said shared buffer resource.

9. The method according to claim 1, further comprising the step of establishing a maximum number of data cells storable in said shared buffer resource.

10. The method according to claim 9, wherein said step of disabling transmission further comprises disabling transmission of said data cell if said first count equals or exceeds said maximum number of data cells storable.

11. The method according to claim 1, wherein said data cells are ATM cells.

12. The method according to claim 1, wherein said data cells are of a predetermined, fixed length.

13. A method of providing prioritized access by data cells of a sending element to a shared buffer resource in a receiving element via a communications resource, said method comprising the steps of: defining a maximum number of priority allocated buffers available in said shared buffer resource for each of a plurality of data cell priorities and storing each of said maximum numbers; storing a value indicative of a number of data cells transmitted by said sending element to said receiving element via said communication resource for storage in said shared buffer resource; modifying said value as data cells are transmitted to said shared buffer resource; identifying a priority assigned to a first data cell; and transmitting said first data cell by said sending element to said receiving element via said communications resource for storage in said shared buffer resource if said value is less than a respective maximum number of priority allocated buffers.

14. The method according to claim 13, further comprising the step of dynamically adjusting one or more of said maximum numbers of priority allocated buffers according to an empirical analysis of data cells to be transmitted.

15. The method according to claim 14, wherein said step of dynamically adjusting one or more of said maximum numbers of priority allocated buffers further comprises dynamically adjusting said maximum numbers of priority allocated buffers according to an empirical analysis of priorities of said data cells of said sending element.

16. The method according to claim 13, further comprising the step of dynamically adjusting one or more of said maximum numbers of priority allocated buffers according to an empirical analysis of utilization of said shared buffer resource.

17. The method according to claim 13, wherein said step of identifying a priority further comprises identifying said priority assigned to said first data cell based upon a connection of said first data cell.

18. The method according to claim 13, wherein for N data cell priorities, said step of defining a maximum number further comprises: defining one maximum number of priority allocated data cells equivalent to a maximum buffer resource capacity; and defining N-1 maximum number of priority allocated data cells equivalent to data cell priority thresholds.

19. The method according to claim 13, wherein said step of modifying said value further comprises receiving the number of buffers allocated to data cells within said shared buffer resource and modifying said value in accordance therewith.

20. The method according to claim 13, wherein said data cells are ATM cells.

21. The method according to claim 13, wherein said data cells are of a predetermined, fixed length.

22. A prioritized buffer sharing apparatus comprising: a communications medium having a sending end and a receiving end; a sending element at said sending end of said communications medium for transmitting a data cell over said communications medium; and a receiving element at said receiving end of said communications medium for receiving said data cell, said receiving element having a prioritized shared buffer resource associated therewith for storing said data cell, wherein said sending element analyzes said data cell to determine a priority associated therewith, and wherein said sending element transmits said data cell to said receiving element via said communications medium for storage in said shared buffer resource if buffers in said shared buffer resource are available for storing data cells of like priority.

23. The prioritized buffer sharing apparatus according to claim 22, wherein said sending element further comprises a processing element and a memory element in which is maintained, by said processing element: a first value representative of a maximum number of data cells storable in said prioritized shared buffer resource; a second value representative of a number of buffers transmitted to said prioritized shared buffer resource for storage therein; and at least one threshold value each representative of a maximum number of data cells of a respective priority which are storable in said prioritized shared buffer resource.

24. The prioritized buffer sharing apparatus according to claim 23, wherein said processing element prohibits transmission of said data cell from said sending element to said receiving element if said second value is not less than said first value.

25. The prioritized buffer sharing apparatus according to claim 23, wherein said processing element prohibits transmission of said data cell if said second value is not less than a respective threshold value for the priority of said data cell.

26. The prioritized buffer sharing apparatus according to claim 23, wherein said at least one threshold value is dynamically adjustable by said processing element based upon an empirical analysis of data cells to be transmitted to said shared buffer resource.

27. The prioritized buffer sharing apparatus according to claim 26, wherein said at least one threshold value is dynamically adjustable by said processing element based upon an empirical analysis of priorities of data cells to be transmitted to said shared buffer resource.

28. The prioritized buffer sharing apparatus according to claim 23, wherein said at least one threshold value is dynamically adjustable by said processing element based upon an empirical analysis of utilization of said shared buffer resource.

29. The prioritized buffer sharing apparatus according to claim 23, wherein there are N possible data cell priorities and N-1 threshold values.

30. The prioritized buffer sharing apparatus according to claim 23, wherein said second value is updated by said processing element according to a number of data cells presently stored within said shared buffer resource.

31. The prioritized buffer sharing apparatus according to claim 22, wherein said data cell is an ATM cell.

32. The prioritized buffer sharing apparatus according to claim 22, wherein said data cell is of a predetermined, fixed length.

Patent Citations (271)

Patent	Date	Inventor
US3804991	1974-04-01	Hammond et al.
US3974343	1976-08-01	Cheney et al.
US4069399	1978-01-01	Barrett et al.
US4084228	1978-04-01	Dufond et al.
US4240143	1980-12-01	Bessemer et al.
US4603382	1986-07-01	Cole et al.
US4715030	1987-12-01	Koch et al.
US4727537	1988-02-01	Nichols
US4737953	1988-04-01	Koch et al.
US4748658	1988-05-01	Gopal et al.
US4797881	1989-01-01	Ben-Artzi
US4821034	1989-04-01	Anderson et al.
US4837761	1989-06-01	Isono et al.
US4845710	1989-07-01	Nakamura et al.
US4849968	1989-07-01	Turner
US4870641	1989-09-01	Pattavina
US4872157	1989-10-01	Hemmady et al.
US4872159	1989-10-01	Hemmady et al.
US4872160	1989-10-01	Hemmady et al.
US4872197	1989-10-01	Pemmaraju
US4878216	1989-10-01	Yunoki
US4893302	1990-01-01	Hemmady et al.
US4893307	1990-01-01	McKay et al.
US4894824	1990-01-01	Hemmady et al.
US4897833	1990-01-01	Kent et al.
US4897841	1990-01-01	Gang, Jr.
US4899333	1990-02-01	Roediger
US4920531	1990-04-01	Isono et al.
US4922503	1990-05-01	Leone
US4933938	1990-06-01	Sheehy
US4942574	1990-07-01	Zelle
US4953157	1990-08-01	Franklin et al.
US4956839	1990-09-01	Torii et al.
US4958341	1990-09-01	Hemmady et al.
US4979100	1990-12-01	Makris et al.
US4993018	1991-02-01	Hajikano et al.
US5014192	1991-05-01	Mansfield et al.
US5021949	1991-06-01	Morten et al.
US5029164	1991-07-01	Goldstein et al.
US5067123	1991-11-01	Hyodo et al.
US5070498	1991-12-01	Kakuma et al.
US5083269	1992-01-01	Syobatake et al.
US5084867	1992-01-01	Tachibana et al.
US5084871	1992-01-01	Carn et al.
US5090011	1992-02-01	Fukuta et al.
US5090024	1992-02-01	Vander Mey et al.
US5093827	1992-03-01	Franklin et al.
US5093912	1992-03-01	Dong et al.
US5115429	1992-05-01	Hluchul et al.
US5119369	1992-06-01	Tanabe et al.
US5119372	1992-06-01	Verbeek
US5128932	1992-07-01	Li
US5130975	1992-07-01	Akata
US5130982	1992-07-01	Ash et al.
US5132966	1992-07-01	Hayano et al.
US5140585	1992-08-01	Tomikawa
US5146474	1992-09-01	Nagler et al.
US5150358	1992-09-01	Punj et al.
US5151897	1992-09-01	Suzuki
US5157657	1992-10-01	Potter et al.
US5163045	1992-11-01	Caram et al.
US5163046	1992-11-01	Hahne et al.
US5179556	1993-01-01	Turner
US5179558	1993-01-01	Thacker et al.
US5185743	1993-02-01	Murayama et al.
US5191582	1993-03-01	Upp
US5191652	1993-03-01	Dias et al.
US5193151	1993-03-01	Jain
US5197067	1993-03-01	Fujimoto et al.
US5198808	1993-03-01	Kudo
US5199027	1993-03-01	Barri
US5239539	1993-08-01	Uchida et al.
US5253247	1993-10-01	Hirose et al.
US5253248	1993-10-01	Dravida et al.
US5255266	1993-10-01	Watanabe et al.
US5257311	1993-10-01	Naito et al.
US5258979	1993-11-01	Domuro et al.
US5265088	1993-11-01	Takigawa et al.
US5267232	1993-11-01	Katsube et al.
US5267235	1993-11-01	Thacker
US5268897	1993-12-01	Komine et al.
US5271010	1993-12-01	Miyake et al.
US5272697	1993-12-01	Fraser et al.
US5274641	1993-12-01	Shobatake et al.
US5274768	1993-12-01	Traw et al.
US5278828	1994-01-01	Chao
US5280469	1994-01-01	Taniguchi et al.
US5280470	1994-01-01	Buhrke et al.
US5282201	1994-01-01	Frank et al.
US5283788	1994-02-01	Morita et al.
US5285446	1994-02-01	Yonehara
US5287349	1994-02-01	Hyodo et al.
US5287535	1994-02-01	Sakegawa et al.
US5289462	1994-02-01	Ahmadi et al.
US5289463	1994-02-01	Mobasser
US5289470	1994-02-01	Chang et al.
US5291481	1994-03-01	Doshi et al.
US5291482	1994-03-01	McHarg et al.
US5295134	1994-03-01	Yoshimura et al.
US5301055	1994-04-01	Bagchi et al.
US5301184	1994-04-01	Uriu et al.
US5301190	1994-04-01	Tsukuda et al.
US5301193	1994-04-01	Toyofuku et al.
US5303232	1994-04-01	Proctor et al.
US5305311	1994-04-01	Lyles
US5309431	1994-05-01	Tominaga et al.
US5309438	1994-05-01	Nakajima
US5311586	1994-05-01	Bogart et al.
US5313454	1994-05-01	Bustini et al.
US5313458	1994-05-01	Suzuki
US5315586	1994-05-01	Charvillat
US5319638	1994-06-01	Lin
US5321695	1994-06-01	Faulk, Jr.
US5323389	1994-06-01	Bitz et al.
US5333131	1994-07-01	Tanabe et al.
US5333134	1994-07-01	Ishibashi et al.
US5335222	1994-08-01	Kamoi et al.
US5335325	1994-08-01	Frank et al.
US5339310	1994-08-01	Taniguchi
US5339317	1994-08-01	Tanaka et al.
US5339318	1994-08-01	Tanaka et al.
US5341366	1994-08-01	Soumiya et al.
US5341373	1994-08-01	Ishibashi et al.
US5341376	1994-08-01	Yamashita
US5341483	1994-08-01	Frank et al.
US5345229	1994-09-01	Olnowich et al.
US5350906	1994-09-01	Brody et al.
US5355372	1994-10-01	Sengupta et al.
US5357506	1994-10-01	Sugawara
US5357507	1994-10-01	Hughes et al.
US5357508	1994-10-01	Le Boudec et al.
US5357510	1994-10-01	Norizuki et al.
US5359592	1994-10-01	Corballs et al.
US5359600	1994-10-01	Ueda et al.
US5361251	1994-11-01	Aihara et al.
US5361372	1994-11-01	Rege et al.
US5363433	1994-11-01	Isono
US5363497	1994-11-01	Baker et al.
US5365514	1994-11-01	Hershey et al.
US5369570	1994-11-01	Parad
US5371893	1994-12-01	Price et al.
US5373504	1994-12-01	Tanaka et al.
US5375117	1994-12-01	Morita et al.
US5377262	1994-12-01	Bales et al.
US5377327	1994-12-01	Jain et al.
US5379297	1995-01-01	Glover et al.
US5379418	1995-01-01	Shimazaki et al.
US5390170	1995-02-01	Sawant et al.
US5390174	1995-02-01	Jugel
US5390175	1995-02-01	Hiller et al.
US5392280	1995-02-01	Zheng
US5392402	1995-02-01	Robrock II
US5394396	1995-02-01	Yoshimura et al.
US5394397	1995-02-01	Yanagi et al.
US5398235	1995-03-01	Tsuzuki et al.
US5400337	1995-03-01	Munter
US5402415	1995-03-01	Turner
US5412648	1995-05-01	Fan
US5414703	1995-05-01	Sakaue et al.
US5418942	1995-05-01	Krawchuk et al.
US5420858	1995-05-01	Marshall et al.
US5420988	1995-05-01	Elliott
US5422879	1995-06-01	Parsons et al.
US5425021	1995-06-01	Derby et al.
US5425026	1995-06-01	Mori
US5426635	1995-06-01	Mitra et al.
US5432713	1995-07-01	Takeo et al.
US5432784	1995-07-01	Ozceran
US5432785	1995-07-01	Ahmed et al.
US5432908	1995-07-01	Heddes et al.
US5434848	1995-07-01	Chimento, Jr. et al.
US5436886	1995-07-01	McGill
US5436893	1995-07-01	Barnett
US5440547	1995-08-01	Easki et al.
US5444702	1995-08-01	Burnett et al.
US5446733	1995-08-01	Tsuruoka
US5446737	1995-08-01	Cidon et al.
US5446738	1995-08-01	Kim et al.
US5448559	1995-09-01	Hayter et al.
US5448621	1995-09-01	Knudsen
US5450406	1995-09-01	Esaki et al.
US5452296	1995-09-01	Shimizu
US5452299	1995-09-01	Thessin et al.
US5455820	1995-10-01	Yamada
US5455825	1995-10-01	Lauer et al.
US5457687	1995-10-01	Newman
US5459724	1995-10-01	Jeffrey et al.
US5459743	1995-10-01	Fukuda et al.
US5461611	1995-10-01	Drake, Jr. et al.
US5463620	1995-10-01	Sriram
US5463629	1995-10-01	Ko
US5463775	1995-10-01	DeWitt et al.
US5465331	1995-11-01	Yang et al.
US5465365	1995-11-01	Winterbottom
US5469003	1995-11-01	Kean
US5473608	1995-12-01	Gagne et al.
US5475679	1995-12-01	Munter
US5479401	1995-12-01	Bitz et al.
US5479402	1995-12-01	Hata et al.
US5483526	1996-01-01	Ben-Nun et al.
US5485453	1996-01-01	Wahlman et al.
US5485455	1996-01-01	Dobbins et al.
US5487063	1996-01-01	Kakuma et al.
US5488606	1996-01-01	Kakuma et al.
US5491691	1996-02-01	Shtayer et al.
US5491694	1996-02-01	Oliver et al.
US5493566	1996-02-01	Ljungberg et al.
US5497369	1996-03-01	Wainwright
US5499238	1996-03-01	Shon
US5504741	1996-04-01	Yamanaka et al.
US5504742	1996-04-01	Kakuma et al.
US5506834	1996-04-01	Sekihata et al.
US5506839	1996-04-01	Hatta
US5506956	1996-04-01	Cohen
US5509001	1996-04-01	Tachibana et al.
US5509007	1996-04-01	Takashima et al.
US5513134	1996-04-01	Cooperman et al.
US5513178	1996-04-01	Tanaka
US5513180	1996-04-01	Miyake et al.
US5515359	1996-05-01	Zheng
US5517495	1996-05-01	Lund et al.
US5519690	1996-05-01	Suzuka et al.
US5521905	1996-05-01	Oda et al.
US5521915	1996-05-01	Dieudonne et al.
US5521916	1996-05-01	Choudhury et al.
US5521917	1996-05-01	Watanabe et al.
US5521923	1996-05-01	Willmann et al.
US5523999	1996-06-01	Takano et al.
US5524113	1996-06-01	Gaddis
US5526344	1996-06-01	Diaz et al.
US5528588	1996-06-01	Bennett et al.
US5528590	1996-06-01	Iidaka et al.
US5528591	1996-06-01	Lauer
US5530695	1996-06-01	Digne et al.
US5533009	1996-07-01	Chen
US5533020	1996-07-01	Byrn et al.
US5535196	1996-07-01	Aihara et al.
US5535197	1996-07-01	Cotton
US5537394	1996-07-01	Abe et al.
US5541912	1996-07-01	Chouchury et al.
US5544168	1996-08-01	Jeffrey et al.
US5544169	1996-08-01	Norizuki et al.
US5544170	1996-08-01	Kasahara
US5546389	1996-08-01	Wippenbeck et al.
US5546391	1996-08-01	Hochschild et al.
US5546392	1996-08-01	Boal et al.
US5550821	1996-08-01	Akiyoshi
US5550823	1996-08-01	Irie et al.
US5553057	1996-09-01	Nakayama
US5553068	1996-09-01	Aso et al.
US5555243	1996-09-01	Kakuma et al.
US5555265	1996-09-01	Kakuma et al.
US5557607	1996-09-01	Holden
US5568479	1996-10-01	Watanabe et al.
US5570361	1996-10-01	Norizuki et al.
US5570362	1996-10-01	Nishimura
US5572522	1996-11-01	Calamvokis et al.
US5577032	1996-11-01	Sone et al.
US5577035	1996-11-01	Hayter et al.
US5583857	1996-12-01	Soumiya et al.
US5583858	1996-12-01	Hanaoka
US5583861	1996-12-01	Holden
US5590132	1996-12-01	Ishibashi et al.
US5600820	1997-02-01	Johnston
US5602829	1997-02-01	Hie et al.
US5610913	1997-03-01	Tomonaga et al.
US5623405	1997-04-01	Isono
US5625846	1997-04-01	Kobayakawa et al.
US5633861	1997-05-01	Hanson et al.
US5648958	1997-07-01	Counterman
US5787086	1998-07-01	McClure et al.

Non-Patent Literature (20)

An Ascom Timeplex White Paper, Meeting Critical Requirements with Scalable Enterprise Networking Solutions Based on a Unified ATM Foundation, pp. 1-12, Apr. 1994.
Douglas H. Hunt, ATM Traffic Management--Another Perspective, Business Communications Preview, Jul. 1994.
Richard Bubenik et al., Leaf Initiated Joined Extensions, Technical Committee, Signalling Subworking Group, ATM Forum/94-0325R1, Jul. 1, 1994.
Douglas H. Hunt et al., Flow Controlled Virtual Connections Proposal for ATM Traffic Management (Revision R2), Traffic Management Subworking Group, ATM Forum/94-0632R2, Aug. 1994.
Flavio Bonomi et al., The Rata-Based Flow Control Framework for the Available Bit Rate ATM Service, IEEE Network, Mar./Apr. 1995, pp. 25-39.
R. Jain, Myths About Congestion Management in High Speed Networks, Internetworking Research and Experience, vol. 3, 101-113 (1992).
Douglas H. Hunt et al., Credit-Based FCVC Proposal for ATM Traffic Management (Revision R1), ATM Forum Technical Committee Traffic Management Subworking Group, ATM Forum/94-0168R1, Apr. 28, 1994.
Douglas H. Hunt et al., Action Item Status for Credit-Based FCVC Proposal, ATM Forum Technical Committee Traffic Management Subworking Group, ATM Forum/94-0439, Apr. 28, 1994.
Timothy P. Donahue et al., Arguments in Favor of Continuing Phase 1 as the Initial ATM Forum P-NNI Routing Protocol Implantation, ATM Forum Technical Committee, ATM Forum/94-0460, Apr. 28, 1994.
Richard Bubenick et al., Leaf Initiated Join Extensions, Technical Committee, Signalling Subworking Group, ATM Forum/94-0325, Apr. 28, 1994.
Rob Coltun et al., PRP: A P-NNI Routing Protocol Proposal, ATM Forum Technical Committe, ATM Form/94-0492, Apr. 28, 1994.
Richard Bubenik et al., Leaf Initiated Join Extensions, ATM Forum Technical Committee, Signalling Subworking Group, ATM Forum 94-0325; Apr. 28, 1994.
Richard Bubenik et al., Requirements For Phase 2 Signaling Protocol, ATM Forum Technical Committee, Signalling Subworking Group, ATM Forum 94-1078, Jan. 1, 1994.
H.T. Kung and K. Chang, Receiver-Oriented Adaptive Buffer Allocation in Credit-Based Flow Control for ATM Networks, Proceedings of INFOCOM '95, Apr. 2-6, 1995, pp. 1-14.
H.T. Kung et al., Credit-Based Flow Control for ATM Networks: Credit Update Protocol Adaptive Credit Allocation, and Statistical Multiplexing, Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM '94 Symposium on Communications Architectures, Protocols and Applications, Aug. 31-Sep. 2, 1994, pp. 1-14.
SITA, ATM REP: C-Overall Technical Requirements, Sep. 1994.
Hosein F. Badran et al., Head of Line Arbitration in ATM Switches with Input-Output Buffering and Backpressure Control, Globecom, pp. 347-351, 1991.
Lepisto, M., "ATM chips and products", Jan. 25, 1995, 36 pages.
Affidavit of Barry C. Kantner, Apr. 17, 1997.
Affidavit of Thomas A. Manning, Apr. 17, 1997.

Abstract

Description