he assigned target delay factor for that link is reached in simulations. In addition to the simulations, the theoretical bandwidths for each individual link for the assigned target delay factor are calculated with the proposed extended M/G/R-PS model and they are compared with the simulated bandwidths. Figure 8.9 presents the required last mile link capacities obtained from both simulations and theoretical calculations using the proposed extended M/G/R-PS model. Figure 8.10 presents the dimensioning results for the backbone link. Approach (3) - Desired E2E delay factor > 1 Approach (3) - Desired E2E delay factor > 1 M/G/R-PS Simulation Target end-to-end delay factor Target end-to-end delay factor (a) last mile link bandwidth (b) relative error Figure 8.9: Validating approach (3): dimensioned last mile link bandwidths over different target delay factors Approach (3) - Desired E2E delay factor > 1 Approach (3) Desired E2E delay factor > 1 10000 M/G/R-PS Simulation Target end-to-end delay factor Target end-to-end delay factor (a) backbone link bandwidth (b) relative error Figure 8.10: Validating approach (3): dimensioned backbone link bandwidths over different target delay factors 8 Dimensioning for Multi-lub RAN Scenario In both figures (a) shows the required last mile link capacities over different target end-to- end delay factors as the QoS criteria, while (b) shows the relative error of the calculated bandwidths. It can be seen in both figures that for the last mile link and the backbone link, the bandwidths given from simulations comply with the theoretical bandwidths derived from the proposed extended M/G/R-PS model. This demonstrates that the proposed M/G/R-PS approach can provide sufficiently exact predictions for the required bandwidth for the elastic traffic flows. The graph in Figure 8.11 (a) shows the average end-to-end delays T for different target end-to-end delay factors as the QoS criteria. The curve represents the mean end-to-end transfer delays measured from simulations for the corresponding target