Performance Analysis of HTTP Reverse Proxies over LEO Constellation
Implementation plan:
Scenario 1 : Baseline Performance
Step 1: Initially, we constructed the network using 3 LEO Satellites, 3 Terminals, 3 ForwarderProxy Servers, User number of Clients, 3 GroundStations, 1 ReverseProxy Server, and 5 Servers.
(ideal conditions with 100 ms latency, 50 Mbps bandwidth and 1 GB cache (LRU))
Step 2: Then, we simulate and collect network data such as positions, packet send/receive, packet size, transmission time, transmit power, path loss, distance, delay, jitter, and packet loss.
Step 3: Next, we analyze the baseline network performance without caching using the collected data.
Step 4: Next, we analyze different caching strategies, workload variation and content popularity based on collected network data.
Step 5: Next, we optimize cache operations using predictive caching and prefetching techniques.
Step 6: Finally, we plot performance for the following metrics:
6.1: Number of Satellites vs. Latency (ms)
6.2: Number of Satellites vs. Response Time (ms)
6.3: Number of Servers vs. Load Distribution (%)
6.4: Number of Clients vs. Cache Hit Rate (%)
6.5: Number of Clients vs. Throughput (Mbps)
Scenario 2 : (High Latency Impact)
Step 1: Initially, we constructed the network using 3 LEO Satellites, 3 Terminals, 3 ForwarderProxies,n number of Clients, 3 GroundStations, 1 ReverseProxy, and 5 Servers.
(higher satellite latency (600–1200 ms), 10 Mbps bandwidth, 1% packet loss, 1 GB cache (LRU))
Step 2: Then, we simulate and collect network data such as positions, packet send/receive, packet size, transmission time, transmit power, path loss, distance, delay, jitter, and packet loss.
Step 3: Next, we analyze the baseline network performance without caching using the collected data.
Step 4: Next, we analyze different caching strategies, workload variation and content popularity based on collected network data.
Step 5: Next, we optimize cache operations using predictive caching and prefetching techniques.
Step 6: Finally, we plot performance for the following metrics:
6.1: Number of Satellites vs. Latency (ms)
6.2: Number of Satellites vs. Response Time (ms)
6.3: Number of Servers vs. Load Distribution (%)
6.4: Number of Clients vs. Cache Hit Rate (%)
6.5: Number of Clients vs. Throughput (Mbps)
Scenario 3 : (Bandwidth Constraints)
Step 1: Initially, we constructed the network using 3 LEO Satellites, 3 Terminals, 3 ForwarderProxies, n number of Clients, 3 GroundStations, 1 ReverseProxy, and 5 Servers.
(bandwidth (1–10 Mbps), 600 ms latency1 GB cache (LRU))
Step 2: Then, we simulate and collect network data such as positions, packet send/receive, packet size, transmission time, transmit power, path loss, distance, delay, jitter, and packet loss.
Step 3: Next, we analyze the baseline network performance without caching using the collected data.
Step 4: Next, we analyze different caching strategies, workload variation and content popularity based on collected network data.
Step 5: Next, we optimize cache operations using predictive caching and prefetching techniques.
Step 6: Finally, we plot performance for the following metrics:
6.1: Number of Satellites vs. Latency (ms)
6.2: Number of Satellites vs. Response Time (ms)
6.3: Number of Servers vs. Load Distribution (%)
6.4: Number of Clients vs. Cache Hit Rate (%)
6.5: Number of Clients vs. Throughput (Mbps)
Software Requirements:
1. Development Tool: OMNeT++ 4.6 or above
2. Operating System: Windows 10 (64-bit) or above
Note
1) If the proposed plan does not fully align with your requirements, please provide all necessary details—including steps, parameters, models, and expected outcomes—in advance. Kindly ensure that any missing configurations or specifications are clearly outlined in the plan before confirming, as post-implementation changes will not be accommodated.
2) If there’s no built-in solution for what the project needs, we can always turn to reference models, customize our own, different math models or write the code ourselves to fulfil the process.
3) If the plan satisfies your requirement, Please confirm with us.
4) Project based on Simulation only.
| Technology | Ph.D | MS | M.Tech |
|---|---|---|---|
| NS2 | 75 | 117 | 95 |
| NS3 | 98 | 119 | 206 |
| OMNET++ | 103 | 95 | 87 |
| OPNET | 36 | 64 | 89 |
| QULANET | 30 | 76 | 60 |
| MININET | 71 | 62 | 74 |
| MATLAB | 96 | 185 | 180 |
| LTESIM | 38 | 32 | 16 |
| COOJA SIMULATOR | 35 | 67 | 28 |
| CONTIKI OS | 42 | 36 | 29 |
| GNS3 | 35 | 89 | 14 |
| NETSIM | 35 | 11 | 21 |
| EVE-NG | 4 | 8 | 9 |
| TRANS | 9 | 5 | 4 |
| PEERSIM | 8 | 8 | 12 |
| GLOMOSIM | 6 | 10 | 6 |
| RTOOL | 13 | 15 | 8 |
| KATHARA SHADOW | 9 | 8 | 9 |
| VNX and VNUML | 8 | 7 | 8 |
| WISTAR | 9 | 9 | 8 |
| CNET | 6 | 8 | 4 |
| ESCAPE | 8 | 7 | 9 |
| NETMIRAGE | 7 | 11 | 7 |
| BOSON NETSIM | 6 | 8 | 9 |
| VIRL | 9 | 9 | 8 |
| CISCO PACKET TRACER | 7 | 7 | 10 |
| SWAN | 9 | 19 | 5 |
| JAVASIM | 40 | 68 | 69 |
| SSFNET | 7 | 9 | 8 |
| TOSSIM | 5 | 7 | 4 |
| PSIM | 7 | 8 | 6 |
| PETRI NET | 4 | 6 | 4 |
| ONESIM | 5 | 10 | 5 |
| OPTISYSTEM | 32 | 64 | 24 |
| DIVERT | 4 | 9 | 8 |
| TINY OS | 19 | 27 | 17 |
| TRANS | 7 | 8 | 6 |
| OPENPANA | 8 | 9 | 9 |
| SECURE CRT | 7 | 8 | 7 |
| EXTENDSIM | 6 | 7 | 5 |
| CONSELF | 7 | 19 | 6 |
| ARENA | 5 | 12 | 9 |
| VENSIM | 8 | 10 | 7 |
| MARIONNET | 5 | 7 | 9 |
| NETKIT | 6 | 8 | 7 |
| GEOIP | 9 | 17 | 8 |
| REAL | 7 | 5 | 5 |
| NEST | 5 | 10 | 9 |
| PTOLEMY | 7 | 8 | 4 |