You are on page 1of 10

World Applied Programming, Vol (1), No (4), October 2011.

278-287
ISSN: 2222-2510
2011 WAP journal. www.waprogramming.com

A Study on Index Based Analysis of Users of Internet Traffic


Sharing In Computer Networking
Diwakar Shukla

Sharad Gangele*

Associate Professor, Dept. of Mathematics and Statistics


Dr. Hari Singh Gour Central University
Sagar, India
diwakarshukla@rediffmail.com

Research Scholar, Dept. of Computer Science


M.P. Bhoj (Open) University
Bhopal, India
sharadgangele@gmail.com

Kapil Verma

Sanjay Thakur

Research Scholar, Dept. of Computer Science


M.P. Bhoj (Open) University
Bhopal, India
kapil_mca100@rediffmail.com

Professor and Head, Dept. of Computer Science


Lord Krishna College of Technology
Indore, India
sanjaymca2002@yahoo.com

___________________________________________________________________________________________
Abstract: Internet is a basic tool of information technology. Cyber crime refers to all unlawful activities that
involve a computer and a network. The computer may have been used in the commission of a crime or it may be
the target. The objective of such crime is to exploit the internet for criminal purposes. It may threaten a nations
security and even its financial health. There are also problems of breach of privacy policy if confidential
information is lost or intercepted. In order to overcome such security and privacy related issues of internet it is
required to strengthen the security rules and the internet traffic distribution. This line of thought will help us in
minimizing such malicious incidents. Working on the same line of improvisation, indexing techniques has been
developed. It combines a variety of factors into single value which helps in predicting the internet users
behavior. This paper takes into account the set-up of two internet service providers environment and on that
indices of different categories are defined. This paper presents index based analysis for cyber criminal in
computer networking. Simulation methodology is performed to support the mathematical finding.
Keywords: Internet traffic, cyber crime, operators choice, connectivity, Transaction probability matrix.
__________________________________________________________________________________________
I.

INTRODUCTION

Cyber crime covers a wide range of activities including espionage to financial threats, competitive market to
strategic planning and that too on national as well as international platform. And when this term is defined on the
Cross-border environment then called cyber warfare. The double edged weapon to fight this energy is to
strengthen the network security and browsing architecture and as the other side, make laws to capture such
wrong doers. Shukla and Thakur (2007) examined crime base user analysis in internet traffic sharing under cyber
crime, by a Markov Chain model. This paper extends the same approach under crime based users categories.
II.

LITERATURE SURVEY

A let of work has been done on this line as issues of cyber crime has became high profile because of its
interlinked issues such as cracking, copyright infringement child pornography and many more such issues.
Newby, M. and Dagg, R. (2002) presents optical inspection and maintenance for stochastically deteriorating
systems, average cost criteria in a new look of markov chain model. Mohammed. A., Al-Shargabi, Abdul Samad
Ismail, and Sevia M. Idrus, (2011) suggested a similar contribution of Internet compressed traffic, a solution for
the explosion of the internet. Naldi, M. (2002) developed an application of markov chain model in Internet
access traffic sharing in a Multi-user environment. Shukla et al. (2007) examined a similar approach in computer
networks by developing a stochastic model for space division switches. Shukla, D. and Thakur, Sanjay, (2007)
discuss a crime based user analysis in internet traffic sharing under cyber crime by application of markov chain
model. Hambali, H. and Ramani, A. K., (2002) examined a performance study of ATM multicast switch with
different traffics in a different look. Hambali, H. and Ramani, A. K., (2002) presents a performance study of a

278

Sharad Gangele et al., World Applied Programming, Vol (1), No (4), October 2011.

multicast switch with different traffic distributions. Francini, A. and Chiussi, F.M. (2002) providing QoS
guarantees to unicast and multicast flows in multistage packet switches. Chen, D.X. and Mark, J.W. (1993)
discussed different aspects on a fast packet switch shared concentration and output queuing. Perzen Emanual,
(1992) and Medhi, J. (1992) gave fundamental concept of Stochastic Processes. Medhi, J. (1991) gave basic
fundamental of stochastic models in queuing theory. Agarwal, Rinkle and Kaur, Lakhwinder (2008) performed a
similar study on reliability analysis of fault-tolerant multistage interconnection networks. Shukla et al. (2010)
presents similar contribution on effects of disconnectivity analysis for congestion control in internet traffic
sharing. Shukla et al. (2009) discuss different aspect of all comparison analysis in internet traffic sharing using
markov chain model in computer networks. Dorea, C.C.Y., Cruz and Rojas, J. A. (2004) examined
Approximation results for non-homogeneous Markov chains and some applications. Paxson Vern, (2004)
developed Experiences with internet traffic measurement and analysis in the field of computer network. Shukla
et al. (2009) developed a Share loss analysis of internet traffic distribution in computer networks. Shukla et al.
(2009) presented a comparison of methods for internet traffic sharing in computer network by using markov
chain model. Shukla, D., Gangele Sharad and Verma, Kapil (2010) discussed a new concept of Internet traffic
sharing under multi-market situations. Andrikopoulos et al. (1999) provided rate guarantees for internet
application traffic across ATM networks in a different pattern. Shukla, D., Gangele Sharad, Verma, Kapil and
Singh, Pankaja (2011) developed a detailed discussion on Elasticities and Index Analysis of Usual Internet
Traffic Share Problem. Shukla, D., Gangele Sharad, Verma, Kapil and Singh Pankaja (2011) developed the
concept of Elasticity of Internet Traffic Distribution of Computer network in two Market Environment.
III.
MARKOV CHAIN MODEL FOR CRIME BASED USERS BEHAVIOUR AS A SYSTEM
(Using Shukla and Thakur (2007))
We have consider five-state discrete-time Markov chain model where {X (n) ,n 0}such that X (n) stands for the
state of random variable X at nth attempt (call or surfing) made by a user over the state space{O1,O2, NC, A,C}
where,
State O1: First operator
State O2: Second operator
State NC: Success (in connectivity) but no cyber-crime
State A: Abandon of attempt process
State C: Connectivity and cyber-crime conduct through surfing.
Considering following hypotheses for the behavior of user, with crime, blocking, and initial choice parameters.
The competitive market has a caf, Containing Internet facility of two Operators O1 and O2.
Some assumptions related to this model are:
(1) The competitive market has a caf, Containing Internet facility of two operators O1 and O2.
(2) A user enters into caf with Predetermined initial choice (first choice) p and (1-p) for O1 and O2
Respectively, (0 p 1).
(3) The connectivity attempt of user between operates are on call-by-call basis, which means if the call for O1 is
blocked in kth attempt (k>0) then in (k+1)th attempt user sift over to O2. If this also fails, user switches to O1.
(4) Whenever call connects either to operator O1 or O2, we say system reaches to the state of success in n attempt
and there user is not perform any cyber crime (non-crime state NC)
(5) The user can terminate the attempt process which is marked as abandon stat A at nth attempt with probability
pA(either O1 or from O2).
(6) While user connects the call through either to O1 or O2, we say system reaches to the state of success (noncrime state NC).Here user allowed to reaching to state C, which is crime sate to perform the cyber crimes.

279

Sharad Gangele et al., World Applied Programming, Vol (1), No (4), October 2011.

(7) If user reaches to crime state C from state NC in nth then in (n+1)th attempt he may call on non-crime state NC
with probability C2 or on again state C with probability(1-C2).
(8) From state C user cannot move to state O1, O2, or A.
(9) State C, NC and A are absorbing sate.
1
C
1-c 1

c2
NC

1-L2

1-L1
L1

O1

O2
L2

L 1 pA

L2 pA
A
1

Fig. 3.1 Transition diagram of model


X (n) States

X(

n 1)

O1

O1

O2
L2 (1 p A )
NC
0

O2

NC

L1 (1 p A ) 1 L1

1 L2

c1

1 c1

c2

1 c2

L1 p A

L2 p A
...(3.1)

Transition probability matrix (see Shukla and Thakur (2007))


Some Results for nth Attempts
The starting conditions (state distribution before the call attempt) are
P X

(0)

P X

(0)

P X

(0)

P X

(0)

= O 2 = 1 p
....(3.2)
= N C = 0

= A = 0

= O1 = p

Theorem : If users attempt are between O1 and O2 then the nth step transitions probability is (using Shukla and
Thakur (2007))

280

Sharad Gangele et al., World Applied Programming, Vol (1), No (4), October 2011.

even

n 1
n
= O1 = (1 p ) L2 ( L1 L2 ) (1 pA ) odd

....(3.3)
n
n

= O2 = (1 p ) ( L1L2 ) (1 pA )
even

n 1
n
= O2 = pL1 ( L1 L2 ) (1 p A )
odd

P X ( n ) = O1 = p
P X ( n )
P X ( n )
P X ( n )

( L1L2 ) (1 pA )
n

IV.

QUALITY OF SERVICE [QOS] (see Shukla and Thakur (2007))

There are various categories type of users as


(i) Faithful user [FU]A user who is faithful to an operator O1 otherwise, it goes to abandon state but does not attempt for O2. The
converse of it may as he attempt for O2 and goes to state A. This described faithful users for operator O1 and O2.
(ii) Impatient user [IU] - User who moves between the two operators O1 and O2 only all the time until call
completes or abandons the process.
(iii) Non cyber criminals [NCC]
(iv) Cyber Criminals [CC]
Cyber Criminals are of two types:
(a)Non-Serious Cyber Criminals [NSCC]
(b) Serious Cyber Criminals [SCC]
The quality of services provided by operators is a function of blocking probabilities (L1 and L2) faced by
operators in the network. More and more blocking probability leads to lesser quality of service for users.
V.

BEHAVIOR OVER LARGE NUMBER OF ATTEMPTS using (as Shukla and Thakur (2007)

We defined traffic share for large number o0f attempt as

P1 lim P1( n) , i = 1, 2
n

(1 L1 ) c1
P1
=
2
NCC
1 L1 L 2 (1 p A )
P2 NCC =
P1
=
CC

P2
=
CC

p + (1 p ) L 2 (1 p A ) ...(5.0)

(1 L2 ) c1 1 p +
)
2 (
1 L1 L2 (1 p A )
(1 L1 )(1 c1 )

1 L1 L 2 (1 p A )

(1

p + (1 p ) L 2 (1 p A ) ...(5 .2 )

L 2 )(1 c1 )

1 L1 L 2 (1 p A )

pL1 (1 p A ) ...(5.1)

(1 p ) + p L1 (1 p A ) ...(5 .3)

P1
=
N SC C

(1 L1 )(1 c1 ) c1
2
1 L1 L 2 (1 p A )

P2
=
NSCC

(1 L2 )(1 c1 ) c1 1 p +
)
2 (
1 L1 L2 (1 p A )

p + (1 p ) L 2 (1 p A ) ...(5.4)

pL1 (1 p A ) ...(5.5)

281

Sharad Gangele et al., World Applied Programming, Vol (1), No (4), October 2011.

(1 L1 )(1 c1 )(1 c2 ) p + 1 p L 1 p ...(5.6)


( ) 2 ( A )
2

1 L1 L2 (1 p A )
(1 L2 )(1 c1 )(1 c2 ) 1 p + pL 1 p ...(5.7)
=
)
1(
A )
2
(
1 L1 L2 (1 p A )

P1 =
SCC

P2
SCC

VI.

INDEX BASED ANALYSIS

We have defined ratio based user index. It has been explained as below
Non cyber criminals [NCC]
For operator O1

I1

(NCC ) =

I1 ( N CC ) =

P1 N C C
P1 N C C + P2 N C C

...( 6 .0 )

(1 L1 ) C1 p + (1 p) L2 (1 pA )
(1 L1 ) C1 p + (1 p) L2 (1 pA ) + (1 L2 ) C1 (1 p) + pL1 (1 pA )

...( 6.1)

For operator O2

I2

( NCC ) =

I2 ( N CC) =

P2 NCC
P1 NCC + P2 NCC

...( 6.2 )

(1 L2 ) C1 (1 p) + pL1 (1 pA )
(1 L1 ) C1 p + (1 p) L2 (1 pA ) + (1 L2 ) C1 (1 p) + pL1 (1 pA )

...( 6.3 )

Cyber Criminals [CC]


For operator O1

I1

(C C ) =

I1 ( CC) =

P1
CC
P1
+ P2 C C
CC

...( 6 .4 )

(1 L1 )(1C1 ) p +(1 p) L2 (1 pA )
(1 L1 )(1C1 ) p +(1 p) L2 (1 pA ) +(1 L2 )(1C1 ) (1 p) + pL1 (1 pA )

For operator O2

I2

(C C ) =

P2 C C
P1 C C + P2 C C

...( 6 .6 )

282

...( 6.5)

Sharad Gangele et al., World Applied Programming, Vol (1), No (4), October 2011.

I2 ( CC) =

(1 L2 )(1C1 ) (1 p) + pL1 (1 pA )
(1 L1 )(1C1 ) p +(1 p) L2 (1 pA ) +(1 L2 )(1C1 ) (1 p) + pL1 (1 pA )

...( 6.7 )

Non-Serious Cyber Criminals [NSCC]


For operator O1

I1 ( NSCC ) =

I1 ( NSCC) =

P1 NSCC
P1 NSCC + P2 NSCC

...( 6.8 )

(1 L1 )(1C1 ) C1 p +(1 p) L2 (1 pA )
(1 L1 )(1C1 ) C1 p +(1 p) L2 (1 pA ) +(1 L2 )(1C1 ) C1 (1 p) + pL1 (1 pA )

...( 6.9 )

For operator O2

I2

( NSCC ) =

I2 ( NSCC) =

P2 N SCC
P1 N SCC + P2 NSC C

...( 6.10 )

(1 L2 )(1C1 ) C1 (1 p) + pL1 (1 pA )
(1 L1 )(1C1 ) C1 p +(1 p) L2 (1 pA ) +(1 L2 )(1C1 ) C1 (1 p) + pL1 (1 pA )

...( 6.11)

Serious Cyber Criminals [SCC]


For operator O1

I 1 ( SCC ) =

I1 ( SCC) =

P1 SCC
P1
+ P2 SCC
SCC

...( 6.12 )

(1L1 )(1C1 )(1C2 ) p+(1 p) L2 (1 pA )


(1L1 )(1C1 )(1C2 ) p+(1 p) L2 (1 pA ) +(1L2 )(1C1 )(1C2 ) (1 p) + pL1 (1 pA )

For operator O2

I2

( SCC ) =

P2 SCC
P1
+ P2 SCC
SCC

...( 6.14 )

283

...(6.13)

Sharad Gangele et al., World Applied Programming, Vol (1), No (4), October 2011.

I2 ( SCC) =

(1L2 )(1C1 )(1C2 ) (1 p) + pL1 (1 pA )


(1L1 )(1C1 )(1C2 ) p+(1 p) L2 (1 pA ) +(1L2 )(1C1 )(1C2 ) (1 p) + pL1 (1 pA )

VII.

SIMULATION STUDY

L2=0.2

L2=0.4

L1=0.2

L2=0.6

L1=0.4

L1=0.6

1
Index I1 NCC

0.8
Index I1 NCC

...( 6.15)

0.6
0.4
0.2

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

0
0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.1

0.9

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Blocking Probability L2
Fig. 2 (p=0.5, pA=0.4, c1=0.07)

Blocking Probability L1
Fig. 1 (p=0.5, pA=0.4, c1=0.07)

In view of figure (1) the index for (NCC) for operator O1 has downward trends and when L2 low, the sifting
Pattern found words lower side. In contrary this figure (2) is showing up ward trend of (NCC) index for operator
O1.

L2=0.4

L1=0.2

L2=0.6
Index I 2 Ncc

Index I 2 Ncc

L2=0.2
1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

L1=0.4

L1=0.6

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

0.1

0.2

Blocking Probability L2
Fig. 3 (p=0.5, pA=0.4, c1=0.07)

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Blocking Probability L2
Fig. 4 (p=0.5, pA=0.4, c1=0.07)

For operator O2 index is similar as in figure (2) in case of NCC. In figure (4) Index shows a downward trend as
similar to fig. (1) for operator O2 for (NCC).
L2=0.4

L1=0.2

L2=0.6

L1=0.4

L1=0.6

0.8
Index I 1 cc

Index I 1 CC

L2=0.2

0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

0.9

0.1

Blocking Probability L1
Fig. 5 (p=0.5, pA=0.4, c1=0.07)

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Blocking Probability L2
Fig. 6 (p=0.5, pA=0.4, c1=0.07)

In view of figure (5) and (6) the index of operator O1 in case of cyber criminal (CC) goes downward where as an
upward trend is observed respectively for different blocking probabilities parameters.

284

Sharad Gangele et al., World Applied Programming, Vol (1), No (4), October 2011.

L2=0.2

L2=0.4

L2=0.6

L1=0.2

L1=0.6

0.8
Index I 2 CC

1
Index I 2 CC

L1=0.4

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

0.6
0.4
0.2
0

0
0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.1

0.9

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Blocking Probability L1
Fig. 8 (p=0.5, pA=0.4, c1=0.07)

Blocking Probability L2
Fig. 7 (p=0.5, pA=0.4, c1=0.07)

The fig. (7) and (8) shows the same pattern for operator O2. In case of cyber criminals (CC) the Fig. (5) and (6)
depicts different blocking of L1 and L2.
L2=0.2

L2=0.4

L2=0.6

L1=0.2

L1=0.6

1
Index I1 NSCC

Index I1 NSCC

0.8

L1=0.4

0.6
0.4
0.2

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

0.1

0.2

Blocking Probability L1
Fig. 9 (p=0.5, pA=0.4, c1=0.07)

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Blocking Probability L2
Fig. 10 (p=0.5, pA=0.4, c1=0.07)

In figure (9) and (10) similar index pattern is being observed as previous for non serious cyber criminals (NSCC)
for operator O1.
L2=0.2

L2=0.4

L2=0.6

L1=0.2

Index I 2 NSCC

Index I 2 NSCC

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

L1=0.4

L1=0.6

0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0

0.9

0.1

0.2

Blocking Probability L1
Fig.11 (p=0.5, pA=0.4, c1=0.07)

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Blocking Probability L2
Fig. 12 (p=0.5, pA=0.4, c1=0.07)

In view of (11) and (12) for operator O2, the index of non serious cyber criminals (NSCC) at various blocking
parameter are same as defined previously.
L2=0.2

L2=0.4

L2=0.6

L1=0.2

L1=0.4

L1=0.6

1
Index I 1 SCC

Index I 1 SCC

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0

0
0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.1

0.9

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Blocking Probability L2
Fig. 14 (p=0.5, pA=0.4, c1=0.07, c2=0.025)

Blocking Probability L1
Fig. 13 (p=0.5, pA=0.4, c1=0.07, c2=0.025)

In contrary to this, in the figure (13) and (14), the index showing up and down pattern similar as to fig.(1) and
(2) in case of serious cyber criminal (SCC) for operator O2.

285

Sharad Gangele et al., World Applied Programming, Vol (1), No (4), October 2011.

L2=0.2

L2=0.4

L1=0.2

L2=0.6

L1=0.4

L1=0.6

0.8
Index I 2 SCC

Index I 2 SCC

1
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2

0.6
0.4
0.2
0

0
0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.1

0.9

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Blocking Probability L2
Fig. 16 (p=0.5, pA=0.4, c1=0.07, c2=0.025)

Blocking Probability L1
Fig. 15 (p=0.5, pA=0.4, c1=0.07, c2=0.025)

In view of fig. (15) and (16), the index depend on L1 and L2 probabilities. The increment in L1 reduced the index
level where as increase in L2 increase the same.
Conclusion
The user index plays an important role in the variation of different kind of cyber users. At the different stages of
blocking, the indices show two difference patterns. Application of Markov Chain model in case of different
category of user is useful for internet traffic sharing in computer networking. If self network blocking is high, the
index reduces. This conclusion recommends the operators to reduce their blocking conditions for better quality
of services.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
One of authors, Dr. D. Shukla is thankful to DST center for Interdisciplinary Mathematical Sciences, BHU, and
Varanasi for providing Associate membership.

REFERENCES
Perzen Emanual, (1992): Stochastic Processes, Holden-Day, Inc., San Francisco, California.J. Clerk
Maxwell, A Treatise on Electricity and Magnetism, 3rd ed., vol. 2. Oxford: Clarendon, 1892, pp.6873.
[2] Medhi, J. (1991): Stochastic models in queuing theory, Academic Press Professional, Inc., San Diego,
CA.K. Elissa, Title of paper if known, unpublished.
[3] Medhi, J. (1992): Stochastic Processes, Ed.4, Wiley Eastern Limited (Fourth reprint), New Delhi.
[4] Hambali, H. and Ramani, A. K., (2002): A performance study of at multicast switch with different traffics,
Malaysian Journal of Computer Science.
[5] Naldi, M. (2002): Internet access traffic sharing in a multi-user environment, Computer Networks.
[6] Newby, M. and Dagg, R. (2002): Optical inspection and maintenance for stochastically deteriorating
systems: average cost criteria, Jour. Ind. Statistics Associations.
[7] Yeian, C. and Lygeres, J. (2005): Stabilization of class of stochastic differential equations with Markovian
switching, System and Control Letters.
[8] Dorea, C.C.Y., Cruz and Rojas, J. A. (2004): Approximation results for non-homogeneous Markov chains
and some applications, Sankhya.
[9] Shukla, D., Gadewar, S. and Pathak, R.K. (2007): A stochastic model for space division switches in
computer networks, International Journal of Applied Mathematics and Computation, Elsevier Journals.
[10] Shukla, D. and Thakur, Sanjay, (2007) Crime based user analysis in internet traffic sharing under cyber
crime, Proceedings of National Conference on Network Security and Management (NCSM-07).
[11] Mohammed. A. Al-Shargabi, Abdul Samad Ismail, and Sevia M. Idrus, (2011): Internet compressed traffic:
a solution for the explosion of the internet, International Journal of Computer Applications.
[12] Agarwal, Rinkle and Kaur, Lakhwinder (2008): On reliability analysis of fault-tolerant multistage
interconnection networks, International Journal of Computer Science and Security (IJCSS)
[13] Paxson Vern, (2004): Experiences with internet traffic measurement and analysis, ICSI Center for Internet
Research International Computer Science Institute and Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
[14] Shukla, D., Tiwari, Virendra, Thakur, S. and Deshmukh,(2009):Share loss analysis of internet traffic
distribution in computer networks, International Journal of Computer Science and Security (IJCSS),
Malaysia.
[1]

286

Sharad Gangele et al., World Applied Programming, Vol (1), No (4), October 2011.

[15] Shukla, D., Tiwari, Virendra, Thakur, S. and Tiwari, M. (2009) :A comparison of methods for internet
traffic sharing in computer network, International Journal of Advanced Networking and Applications
(IJANA).
[16] Shukla, D., Tiwari, V. and Kareem Abdul, (2009) All comparison analysis in internet traffic sharing using
markov chain model in computer networks, Georgian Electronic Scientific Journal: Computer Science and
Telecommunications.
[17] Shukla, D., Tiwari, Virendra, and Thakur, S. (2010): Effects of disconnectivity analysis for congestion
control in internet traffic sharing, National Conference on Research and Development Trends in ICT
(RDTICT-2010), Lucknow University, Lucknow.
[18] Chen, D.X. and Mark, J.W. (1993):A fast packet switch shared concentration and output queuing, IEEE
Transactions on Networking, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 142-151.
[19] Shukla, D. , Gangele Sharad and Verma, Kapil (2010): Internet traffic sharing under multi-market
situations, Published in Proceedings of 2nd National conference on Software Engineering and Information
Security, Acropolis Institute of Technology and Research, Indore, MP, (Dec. 23-24,2010), pp49-55.
[20] Francini, A. and Chiussi, F.M. (2002): Providing QoS guarantees to unicast and multicast flows in
multistage packet switches, IEEE Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 20, no. 8, pp. 1589-1601.
[21] Shukla, D., Gangele Sharad, Verma, Kapil and Singh Pankaja (2011): Elasticity of Internet Traffic
Distribution Computer Network in two Market Environment, Journal of Global research in Computer
Science (JGRCS) Vol.2, No. 6, pp.6-12.
[22] Shukla, D., Gangele Sharad, Verma, Kapil and Singh, Pankaja (2011): Elasticities and Index Analysis of
Usual Internet Traffic Share Problem, International Journal of Advanced Research in Computer Science
(IJARCS),Vol. 02, No. 04, pp.473-478.

287

You might also like