y service class is guaranteed in the simulations. The second observation is that the obtained end-to-end delays from the simulations for the BE HSPA service class are close to the target delays, but for the other four service classes the simulated delays are far lower than their target delays (i.e. the end-to-end delays of these four service classes are overachieved with the dimensioned bandwidths). That means, in the configured scenarios the BE HSPA service class is the worst case for dimensioning, which requires the most bandwidth to satisfy its defined QoS requirement. According to the proposed dimensioning approach described in section 7.3.3, the dimensioned bandwidth needs to satisfy the desired target delay factor of every service class. Therefore, in the given example, the dimensioning of the individual links are according to the bandwidth requirements of the BE HSPA service class. As a result, the delay performances of the BE HSPA service reach the desired HSPA end-to-end delay targets while the ones of other four service classes are overachieved. End-to-end application delay per service class (seconds) Service Class Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3 target simulated target simulated target simulated AF11- RAB 64 kbps AF21- RAB 128 kbps AF31 RAB 256 kbps AF41- RAB 384 kbps BE HSPA Table 8.5: Target end-to-end delay QoS VS. simulated delay target: target end-to-end delay according to the target end-to-end delay factor simulated: measured end-to-end application delay from simulations Figure 8.16 presents the resultant degree of overbooking on the backbone link from the above dimensioning results in both simulations and analytical calculations, where the graph (a) shows the derived overbooking factors and the graph (b) shows the deviations of the overbooking factors derived from the simulations and the ones from the proposed analytical approach. With the dimensioned last mile link bandwidth and the backbone link bandwidth, the overbooking factor of the backbone link is calculated with equation (8.1). It is ob