a) Why can we have the packet header in virtual circuit switching to be much sma

Question

a) Why can we have the packet header in virtual circuit switching to be much smaller than the typical header in datagram switching?
b) Assume that we are using datagram switching (i.e. we are not using virtual circuits). Is it possible to guarantee bandwidth to each source-destination pair? Are there disadvantages of doing this using datagram switching?
c) What is the big-O complexity of processing the header of a packet if we are using virtual circuits? Briefly explain why.
d) Why in virtual circuits do we need a datagram routing table (in addition to the virtual circuit table)
e) In the Internet, we have the option of doing source routing (IP does have an option for this). What do you think could be the uses for it? Can you come up with two of them?

Explanation / Answer

Answer a :

In Virtual Switching , since every one of the packets will take after a similar path, a worldwide header is required just for the main bundle of the association and different packets for the most part don't require worldwide headers. While as in Datagram circuit switching , each parcel is allowed to pick any path, all packets must be related with a header with legitimate data about source and the upper layer information. Packets are conveyed out of request and that implies each parcel won't not be of same size. In virtual circuits the delivery of packets is all together so the parcel size is same.

DEAR PLEASE DO RATE IT IF HELPS ELSE LET ME KNOW YOUR DOUBT.

KINDLY POST SEPARATELY AS WE ARE RESTRICTED TO ANSWER MORE THAN ONE QUESTION FROM MULTIPLE POSTED QUESTIONS.

Related Questions

Navigate

• Browse (All)
• Browse A
• Subjects

Integrity-first tutoring: explanations and feedback only — we do not complete graded work. Learn more.