Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Tom Billhartz

dblp:35/2996 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 1997
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Computer networks · 2 · 2 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Computer networks
2 papers
Routing and switching · 57% Wireless networking · 37% Network performance modeling · 6%
Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
1 paper
Performance modeling and evaluation · 100%

Topics — the 6 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Routing and switching
multicast routing
0.021997
Performance and Resource Cost Comparisons for the CBT and PIM Multicast Routing Protocols · IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 1997
Performance and Resource Cost Comparisons for the CBT and PIM Multicast Routing Protocols in DIS Environments · INFOCOM 1996
Wireless networking › interference modeling
SINR model
0.021997
Performance and Resource Cost Comparisons for the CBT and PIM Multicast Routing Protocols · IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 1997
Performance and Resource Cost Comparisons for the CBT and PIM Multicast Routing Protocols in DIS Environments · INFOCOM 1996
Routing and switching › multicast routing
core-based trees
0.011997
Performance and Resource Cost Comparisons for the CBT and PIM Multicast Routing Protocols · IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 1997
Network performance modeling › protocol performance analysis
routing protocol comparison
0.011997
Performance and Resource Cost Comparisons for the CBT and PIM Multicast Routing Protocols · IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 1997
Performance modeling and evaluation › simulation › communication system simulation
network simulation
0.011996
Performance and Resource Cost Comparisons for the CBT and PIM Multicast Routing Protocols in DIS Environments · INFOCOM 1996
Performance modeling and evaluation › network performance analysis
protocol performance comparison
0.011996
Performance and Resource Cost Comparisons for the CBT and PIM Multicast Routing Protocols in DIS Environments · INFOCOM 1996

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

queueing analysis · 0.0network simulation · 0.0simulation · 0.0
YearPublicationVenuePosition
1997 Performance and Resource Cost Comparisons for the CBT and PIM Multicast Routing Protocols
abstract
Researchers have proposed the core-based trees (CBTs) and protocol independent multicasting (PIM) protocols to route multicast data an internetworks. We compare the simulated performance of CBT and PIM using the OPNET network simulation tool. Performance metrics include end-to-end delay, network resource usage, join time, the size of the tables containing multicast routing information, and the impact of the timers introduced by the protocols. We also offer suggestions to improve PIM sparse mode while retaining the ability to offer both shared tree and source-based tree routing.
Tom Billhartz, J. Bibb Cain, Ellen Farrey-Goudreau, Doug Fieg, Stephen G. Batsell
IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun.1
1996 Performance and Resource Cost Comparisons for the CBT and PIM Multicast Routing Protocols in DIS Environments
abstract
Researchers have proposed the core based trees (CBT) and protocol independent multicasting (PIM) protocols to route multicast data on internetworks. The performance of these protocols is examined in the distributed interactive simulation (DIS) environment using the OPNET network simulation tool. The simulation results provide measures of important performance metrics including end-to-end delay, network resource usage, and join time. The size of the tables containing multicast routing information and the impact of the timers introduced by the protocols are also examined. Suggestions are offered to improve PIM Sparse while retaining the ability to offer both shared tree and source-based tree routing.
Tom Billhartz, J. Bibb Cain, Ellen Farrey-Goudreau, Doug Fieg, Stephen G. Batsell
INFOCOM1