comparisons of opnet and qualnet by third parties
TRANSCRIPT
Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc. 1
Comparisons of OPNET and QualNet by Third Parties
2Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
SummaryObjective: Fair comparisons of two commercial simulators via studies conducted by third parties for their own projectsThree studies:
Selection of the best simulator on the market for MANET studies:BISON report (by a European research project)Evaluation of OPNET and QualNet on their runtime (sequential) performance: OSPFv2 report (by Boeing Phantom Works)Practicality of parallelizing existing simulators designed for sequential execution: WSC paper (by Georgia Institute of Technologies)
Benchmark projectQuotes from users of both QualNet and OPNET
Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc. 3
Architecture of the Simulation Environment*
From a report (June 2003) for the BISON project(Slides prepared by SNT)
A. Montresor, G. D. Caro and P. E. HeegaardUniversita di Bologna (Italy), Telenor Communication AS (Norway),
Technische Universitat Dresden (Germany), IDSIA (Switzerland), Santa Fe Institute (USA)
* Funded by the European Commission under the InformationSociety Technologies Programme of the 5th Framework (1998-2002)
4Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Study 1: OverviewBISON: Biology-Inspired Techniques for Self Organization in Dynamic NetworksDiscrete event simulation as the main tool to study and predict the behavior of communication networksSimulation requirements completely different for different types of networks
Mobile ad hoc networks (MANETs): routing, traffic and mobility patternsOverlay networks: millions of nodes
Identifying the best simulation tool to meet various requirements for the BISON project(SNT note: this slide set summarizes only the MANET section)
5Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Selection CriteriaSelection criteria for mobile ad hoc networks (1-8)
6Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Selection Criteria (Cont’d)Selection criteria for mobile ad hoc networks (9-15)
7Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
State-of-the-art of Network Simulators
Possible candidates to build up our simulation environment:
OPNETGloMoSimQualNetNS-2OMNeT++
Investigate the characteristics of these simulators and their general “compliance” to the selection criteria
8Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Study 1 ConclusionsQualNet as Simulation Framework
None of reviewed simulators possesses set of characteristics required by BISON’s research plans and objectivesHowever, QualNet appears as the best compromise:
An extensive set of pre-built models, protocols and algorithmsA good level of acceptance from the scientific communityAn excellent scalabilityA rather good, highly modular, software designA satisfactory level of usability, modifiability and expandabilityAdvanced graphical and mathematical tools for experiment building, monitoring and post-processingGood documentationPossibility of parallel and/or distributed implementations
9Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Conclusions (Cont’d)Other simulators
OMNeT++ does not include an extensive set of models, protocols and algorithmsOnly QualNet and OMNeT++ can scale up to thousands of nodesFor the ease to use/modify/extend, NS-2 scores poorly, QualNet and OPNET are comparable, and OMNeT++ seems the best among all
We leave open the possibility to use either NS-2 or OMNeT++ in the future
If QualNet limits for our research
Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc. 10
Study 2: QualNet and OPNET Evaluation
From a report (December 2002) approved for release
(Slides prepared by SNT)T. Henderson and J. Kim
Communications Network TechnologiesBoeing Phantom Works
11Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
OSPFv2 model comparison Software
OPNET Modeler 8.0QualNet ver. 3.1e
Hardware1 GHz Pentium 4 machine (single processor) with 1 GB RAM
•No support for virtual paths•No support for AS external LSA•No support for authentication and checksum processing•No support of incremental LSA update•No support of equal cost multipath
QualNet, based on RFC 2328
OSPFv2
•No support for virtual paths•No support for AS external routes•No support for authentication and checksum processing•No support for Type of Service (TOS)-based routing
OPNET library, based on RFC 2328
OSPFv2
Limitations or issuesSourceProtocol
12Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Target ScenarioA simplified topology analogous to the current Naval afloat scenario
Ship_1 (3)
Host (14)
Satellite(23)
Antenna_SAT_1(17)
Host (15)
Antenna_SAT_1(18)
Antenna_LOS_1(21)
Host (16)
Antenna_SAT_1(19)
Antenna_SAT_2(20)
Antenna_LOS_1(22)
Ship_Router(11)
Ship_Router(13)
Ship_Router(12)
NOC_Router_0(6)
NOC_Antenna_0(7)
NOC_Antenna_3(10)
NOC_Antenna_2(9)
NOC_Antenna_1(8)
192.4.1.2
192.1.3.2
192.2.3.2192.1.2.2
192.1.1.2
192.2.3.1
192.3.2.2
192.1.3.1
192.4.3.1
192.4.3.2
192.3.2.1
192.1.2.1
192.4.2.1
192.4.2.2
192.1.1.1
192.4.1.1
Ship_0 (2)
Ship_2 (4)
NOC (1)
Fleet (5)
A0
A0
A0
A0
A0
A0
A0A0
A0
A0
A3
A2
A1
13Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Target Scenario (Cont’d)Two clusters of simulated topology:
SHF=256 kb/s, metric 800 (SAT)
DWTS =256 kb/s, metric 700 (LOS)
INMARSAT=64 kb/s, metric 1300 (SAT)
EHF LDR=32 kb/s, metric 2700 (LOS)
HTTP
CBR FTP
HTTP
CBR FTP
HTTP
FTP
HTTP
CBR FTP
HTTP
CBR
HTTP
CBR FTP
HTTP
CBR FTP
HTTP
CBR
HTTP
CBR FTP
HTTP
CBR
192.5.1.1 192.5.2.1
192.5.3.1 192.5.4.1
192.5.5.1
192.5.6.1 192.5.7.1
192.5.8.1 192.5.9.1
192.5.10.1
192.1.1.1 192.1.2.1
192.1.3.1 192.1.4.1
192.1.5.1
192.1.6.1 192.1.7.1
192.1.8.1192.1.9.1
192.1.10.1
192.3.1.1
192.3.1.2
192.3.2.1
192.3.2.2
192.3.4.1 192.3.4.2
192.3.6.1
192.3.6.2
192.3.7.1
192.3.7.2
192.1.10.2
192.1.8.2192.1.9.2
192.6.1.3192.6.1.2192.6.1.1
192.1.4.2
192.1.2.2
192.1.1.2
192.1.3.2
192.1.5.2
192.1.6.2
192.1.7.2
Ship 0 Ship 1
Ship 2 Ship 3
Ship 4
Ship 5 Ship 6
Ship 7 Ship 8
Ship 9
NOC (Network Operating Center)
FTP
CBR FTP
FTP
FTP
SHF=256 kb/s, metric 800 (SAT)
DWTS =256 kb/s, metric 700 (LOS)
INMARSAT=64 kb/s, metric 1300 (SAT)
EHF LDR=32 kb/s, metric 2700 (LOS)
HTTP
CBR FTP
HTTP
CBR FTP
HTTP
FTP
HTTP
CBR FTP
HTTP
CBR
HTTP
CBR FTP
HTTP
CBR FTP
HTTP
CBR
HTTP
CBR FTP
HTTP
CBR
192.5.1.1 192.5.2.1
192.5.3.1 192.5.4.1
192.5.5.1
192.5.6.1 192.5.7.1
192.5.8.1 192.5.9.1
192.5.10.1
192.1.1.1 192.1.2.1
192.1.3.1 192.1.4.1
192.1.5.1
192.1.6.1 192.1.7.1
192.1.8.1192.1.9.1
192.1.10.1
192.3.1.1
192.3.1.2
192.3.2.1
192.3.2.2
192.3.4.1 192.3.4.2
192.3.6.1
192.3.6.2
192.3.7.1
192.3.7.2
192.1.10.2
192.1.8.2192.1.9.2
192.6.1.3192.6.1.2192.6.1.1
192.1.4.2
192.1.2.2
192.1.1.2
192.1.3.2
192.1.5.2
192.1.6.2
192.1.7.2
Ship 0 Ship 1
Ship 2 Ship 3
Ship 4
Ship 5 Ship 6
Ship 7 Ship 8
Ship 9
NOC (Network Operating Center)
FTP
CBR FTP
FTP
FTP
14Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Validation of Simulation ResultsTraffic load comparison for 20 clusters (500-600 nodes)
Considerable amount of similarity between results of the two simulators except for the OSPF database description traffic(SNT note: while both are valid, a database description packet likely contains multiple LSA headers in real implementation)(SNT note: database description packets: 3.3% of total number of packets)
232,170,190233,095,429434,356442,315TOTAL
10,075,93212,317,74762,52456,450HTTP
185,473,106184,046,684217,929222,285FTP
23,490,00023,490,00015,66015,660CBR
8887921822LSRs
1,134,1801,743,24416,42012,416LSAs
6,996,7886,853,83446,84446,708LSUs
1,123,496767,2481,01114,824DBASE_DESCs
3,875,8003,875,88073,95073,950HELLOs
QualNetOPNETQualNetOPNET
Total Number of BytesTotal Number of PacketsPacket Type
15Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Memory ConsumptionMemory Usage vs Number of Clusters (log scale)
QualNet provides one order of magnitude memory usage reduction over OPNET
1
10
100
1000
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Number of Clusters
Mem
ory
Usa
ge (M
byte
s)
QualNetOPNET
16Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
RuntimeSimulation Time vs Number of Clusters (log scale)
QualNet provides two orders of magnitude simulation time reduction over OPNETEven with 20 clusters, the QualNet simulations executed in better than real-time
5.5e-4
5.5e-3
0.055
0.55
5.5
55.5
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500Number of Nodes
Sim
ulat
ion
time/
Rea
l tim
e ra
tio QualNet
OPNET
Fasterthanreal time
5.5e-4
5.5e-3
0.055
0.55
5.5
55.5
50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500Number of Nodes
Sim
ulat
ion
time/
Rea
l tim
e ra
tio QualNet
OPNET
Fasterthanreal time
Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc. 17
Study 3: Parallel Simulations Using OPNET*
Prof. Richard FujimotoGeorgia Institute of Technology
[email protected](excerpted and reformatted)
* Funded by a grant from the National Science Foundation
18Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Executive SummaryKey issues in federating network simulators
Event exchange and synchronizationImplemented using proxies
Static global variablesImplemented using ghost nodes
Dynamic global variables and zero lookahead eventsProblematic: requires substantial revision to model
OPNETSimple models can be readily parallelized (UDP/IP)Many models require substantial revision because of global state and zero lookahead events
[Federating: running the simulator on parallel architectures.]
19Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
The Global State Problem
Network simulators are often designed assuming complete, global information of the network; e.g., computing routesA federate simulating a subnetwork has incomplete information
Federate 1 Federate 2
read
?read
20Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Solution Approach: Ghost Nodes
Assume state information does not change during execution (static state)Ghost node: a skeleton model representing a remote LP which caches remote state informationInstantiate ghost node object for each remote LP referenced by an LP
read
read
ghost nodeactual nodeuninstantiated
21Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
LookaheadLookahead is defined as the minimum simulation time into the future that a federate can schedule an event
Federate A
Federate B
Federate C
Federate D
Simulation Time
problem: limited concurrencyeach federate must process events in time stamp order
TA
possible messageOK to process
event
not OK to process yet
without lookahead
TA+LA
possible messageOK to process
with lookahead
Lookahead is necessary to allow concurrent processing of events with different time stamps (unless optimistic event processing is used)
SNT Proprietary
22Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Zero Lookahead Events
OPNET: Interrupts generate zero lookahead eventsFTP schedules an event for destination indicating end of transmission
Zero lookahead events essential serialize executionZero lookahead does not happen “in nature;” artifact of the way the network model was developedSolutions
Modify model to eliminate zero lookahead interactionsRequire substantial revision to existing software
Interrupt @ time 100
SimulationTime = 100
23Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Study 3:ConclusionsOPNET models will require significant revision to federate with other network simulations (even, other OPNET federates)Because of the above difficulties, work on OPNET for NSF project has been stoppedExtension to include Opnet appears to be problematic, will add significant risk to the project
24Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Study 4.Tool Comparison by a Commercial European
Organization
25Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Study 4: Comparison
ANSI C / C++Procedural model
design!
ANSI C / C++Procedural model
design!
OO-Design / C++OO-Designed models
Combination of TCL and ANSI C
Language “Model”
No access to simulation kernel
source code.Full access to
modules source code.
No access to simulation kernel
source code.Full access to
modules source code.
Full access to simulation kernel
and modules source code.
Full access to simulation kernel
and modules source code.
Access to Source Code
Sim Platform and modules
documented. “Source code
reading” necessary.
Very good documentation.
Sim. Platform and modules good documented.
Sim. Platform well documented.Rudimentary
modules documentation
available.
Available Documentation
Commercial License (Floating License)Sim. Platform: $
24000Runtime license: $
12000
Commercial License (Floating License)Sim. Platform: $
40000.-Runtime license: $
4000
Commercial license:Sim. Platform: US $
15000.-Support: US $
1800.- p.aNo costs for runtime
license
Open SourceFree Available
License Model / Costs
QualNetProduct 3 OPNET
Product 2 OMNET++Product 1 NS-2
26Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Study 4: Comparison continued…
Yes(Each job requires
one runtime license!)NoYesYes
Usage in Linux GRID Possible
Windows NT/2000Linux
Sun OS (SPARC)
Windows NT/2000Sun OS (SPARC)
Windows NT/2000Linux
Windows 95/98/MEWindows NT/2000
Linux
Supported Platforms
ModerateModerate to highModerate to highVery highAssumed Period
of Vocational Adjustment
Main modules available.
(IPv6 still trail with limited functionality)
Necessary Investment:
QoS Module: US $ 10000
Main modules available.Necessary
Investment:IPv6: US $ 25000.-MPLS: US $ 25000.-
Main modules available.
(IPv4, IPv6, MPLS)Routing Protocols missing! (OSPF)
Main modules available.
Interoperability between different
modules not given!
Model Library
QualNetProduct 3 OPNET
Product 2 OMNET++Product 1 NS-2
27Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Study 5.Benchmark study by a major defense contractor
28Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Study 5. Benchmarking ProjectNumber of Nodes
A single division is to be modeledDivision - has 4 brigadesBrigade – each brigade has 4 battle groupsBattle group – each has 2 companies and 2 squadronsCompany – each has 16 Warriors organized into 4 platoon commandsSquadron – each has 12 tanks organized into 3 troop commands
29Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Study 5. Benchmarking tools
Voice traffic will use VHF or HF. Data traffic will use HCDR if available. The division HQ, Brigade HQ, and Battle Group HQ will be equipped with HCDR. If an entity is not equipped with HCDR, data will be sent over VHF / HF. Voice traffic always takes priority over data traffic.
30Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Study 5. Benchmarking toolsRadio Parameters
Radio Type, Transmit power, Frequency Range, Data Rate, VHF16W, 30-88 MHz, 2400 bps, HF100W, 1.5-30 MHz, 2400 bps, HCDR 20W, 225-450 MHz, 244 KbpsAll radios have an antenna height of 2 meters. Each radio runs 802.11 and utilizes OSPFv2 routing.
31Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Study 5. Benchmarking toolsData Traffic
All vehicles send a position report every minute. These reports get routed to all other vehicles.Size of position report: assume 100 bytes200 users send a 50 kbyte message every 5 minutes
Voice TrafficVoice traffic on each of the defined voice nets:Division: 50% of the timeBrigade: 45% of the timeBattle group: 45% of the time
32Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Study 6. Benchmarking toolsProtocols required are as follows:
Protocol Simple Jammer models (repeater, look-thru, follow, spot, barrage)RS-423FED-STD-1052 (ARQ)STANAG-4538 HF Data Link, Clustering Protocol, QBL-MSK ModulationTCP, UDP, IPv4, IEEE 802.11 CSMA/CA, EthernetOSPFv2DHCPFECSNMPv1 Interface
33Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Study 5. Benchmarking toolsTerrainGaming area: 120 km by 70 kmTerrain model: Irregular Terrain Model
(Longley-Rice)
34Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Study 5. Benchmarking toolsMovement
Division HQ – noneBrigade HQ - noneBattle group HQ - noneCompany / Squadron group – yes (60% of entities in constant movement)Assume the moving entities move in a square 1 km x 1 km
Scenario DurationThe scenario will run for 30 minutes.
35Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Study 5. Benchmarking toolsScenario preparation
SNT 1.5 weeks and working flawlesslyOPNET 8 weeks and modeled only fractions of the network with no terrain effects.
Problems with OSPF…long run times and crashesNo Linux implementationNo GUI implementation
36Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Study 5. Benchmark Setup
none-111 dBmPropagation Limit
5 mElevation update resolution
01DTED level
Longley-Rice (ITM)Longley-Rice (ITM)Propagation Path Loss
20 km/h30 km/hVehicle speed
100 m100 mPosition update resolution
NE 34.99 -119.01; Fort Hood, display: SW 34.01 -119.7772; contour lines cross
Terrain
802.11b, routing OSPFv2 (RFC 2328), IPv4, TCP, UDP
802.11b, routing OSPFv2 (RFC 2328)
Protocols
19301866Nodes
Windows 2000Windows 2000OS
Dual 1.2GHz Pentium III1GBDual 1.2GHz Pentium III 1GBPC
OPNETQualNet
37Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Study 5. Benchmark Setup (Cont.)
gmsk - BER tablegmsk - BER tableEncoding
nonenonePropagation fading model
statisticalPropagation model
2 meters, omnidirectional2 meters, omnidirectionalAntenna height
20 W20 WTransmit power HCDR
16 W16 WTransmit power VHF
100 bytes / min, staggered100 bytes / min, staggeredPosition reports
200200Data users
50 kbytes every 5 min50 kbytes every 5 minData equivalent
1.25 kbytes every 7.5 sData traffic
16 kbit / s16 kbit / sVoice equivalent
OPNETQualNet
38Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Study 5. BenchmarkTiming Results
Despite using a full OSPF implementation, 10 times the number of terrain posts along a line of sight, and 50% more terrain calculations, QualNet was still more than twice as fast as OPNET.
Slowly increases to 1.2 GB800 MBCore memory usage
3-20 minutes22 secInitialization time
2966 secExecution time (2 CPUs)
1h 46m 7s = 6367 sec3130 secExecution time (1 CPU)
156.5 million175 millionEvents
OPNETQualNet
39Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Study 5. BenchmarkConclusion
QualNet twice as fast as OPNETOPNET numerous crashes, questionable computed delays, twice as slowQualNet delivered on time, no crashes, and computed results were as expected…twice as fast.QualNet executed faster than real timeQualNet is the clear winner
40Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
QualNet Customer Experiences“We chose QualNet because it is the most promising tool to realistically simulate battlefield communications in real-time.”
-John Powers, Raytheon
“The parallel simulation kernel has the potential to allow our proposed simulation environment to execute in near real time. The serial simulation execution appears to be very efficient.”
-Highland Systems
41Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Customer Experiences“We ran a model in QualNet of a hybrid mobile
and satellite network with over 500 nodes, running the Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) routing protocol and application traffic. The model ran faster than real time and was about 100 times faster than another widely used network simulator modeling the same scenario. Furthermore, the output from QualNet was validated at a packet-by-packet level.”
Tom Henderson, Boeing Phantom Works
42Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Customer ExperiencesAbout Scalability“I use QualNet because scalability is my #1 concern. My typical simulation scenarios have thousands of nodes. There is no other simulator that can deliver that kind of scalability.”
Chien-Chung Chen, University of Delaware
43Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Customer ExperiencesAbout High Fidelity Models“We recently finished porting our MANET routing protocol
into QualNet. It turns out that QualNet also makes a good stress-testing tool for MANET code. Larger scale tests in QualNet uncovered a bug in one of the routing table calculation routines that did not manifest itself in any of our previous testing.”
Andreas Yankopolus, Scientific Research Corporation
“QualNet is interesting to our team because we do a lot of our own coding. The QualNet code base is clean and intuitive and has easy-to-follow APIs.”
Tom Henderson, Boeing Phantom Works
44Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Customer ExperiencesAbout the QualNet Modeling Environment“[QualNet’s] fixed layer architecture approach
makes adding, deleting, inserting layers possible, but difficult to maintain for non-expert users –this will be important in proposed simulation environment as layer structure needs to be flexible and include layers other than traditional communications layers – SNT is working on improving this in the next few months.”
-Highland Systems
45Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Customer Experiences"My focus is building protocols for reliable and scalable networks in mobile
wireless environments. My productivity is high with QualNet because of the product's detailed physical layer models and diverse set of protocol models. I can build my own models fast using QualNet."
-Chien-Chung Chen, University of Delaware
“Currently a fixed set of layers is in place in QualNet (application, transport, network, link, physical & antenna). A set of API’s is defined to allow communications across the layers. This can be limiting if there is a need/desire to include an intermediate layer such as an adaptation layer –or as an example, if the network layer is providing control directly to an antenna by going around the link layer.”
-Highland Systems(QualNet’s layer-based modeling paradigm is intuitive because it matches the
ISO stack. Models based on layers enable and enforce high fidelity protocol models. There is a learning curve in switching to any new technology, and QualNet is not an exception.)
46Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Customer Experiences“QualNet does not allow use of global variables in parallel
simulations. This is for purposes of running parallel simulations so that strict partitions can be drawn between objects. This can be limiting when it comes to keeping statistics across the network.”
-Highland Systems(QualNet outlaws global variables to enable fast execution
speeds. In QualNet’s defense, there are ways to collect statistics throughout the simulation that still allow parallel execution of a model. In other words, solutions exist for this limitation.)
47Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Customer ExperiencesAbout the Physical Layer Modeling“SNT is focused on the wireless, mobile, DoD environment
and new product developments directly support this.”-Highland Systems
“QualNet’s channel modeling includes path loss, antenna, transmit power, interference, SINR vs. BER, transmission delay, propagation delay. QualNet also includes a TIREM interface, 2-ray reflection model, and turbo-coding. Appears sufficient for proposed simulation environment.”
-Highland Systems
48Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Customer Experiences“Antenna Support [includes] custom 3-D antenna
pattern support with full 3-D specification. SNR Curve/FEC Support--QualNet provides a general SNR vs. BER input capability and has facilities for providing turbo-code inclusion. Potentially useful in detailed communications simulations.”
-Highland Systems
49Confidential and Proprietary - Scalable Network Technologies, Inc.
Customer ExperiencesAbout the Company“QualNet is an up and coming tool that is
improving rapidly. The SNT staff is talented and motivated. SNT is also very responsive to user needs and has been very willing to listen to customers.”
-Highland Systems