Abstract —The paper addresses the performance evaluation along with selection of descend percentage value selection, call barring alarm level and deploying test scenario of call admission control in an IP bearer network. The premise of call admission control is to provide the reliability of call over the IP network when congestion happens. The system module includes the MSC Server, Media Gateway, and Router. The software component includes the program and code implemented via manageable client interface. In its completion, the call admission control service was planned and designed in the manner that it functioned properly. Index Terms—Internet Protocol Call Admission Control (IP CAC), Internet Protocol Quality of Service (IP QoS), Media Gateway (MGW), Mobile Switching Center (MSC) server, Call Barring Alarm Level (CBAL), Call Connection Ratio (CCR), First Decent Percentage (FDP), Second Decent Percentage (SDP). I. INTRODUCTION Compared with traditional TDM network, IP transport has a fatal weakness. It supposes that the bandwidth of IP backbone is large enough and always allows packet forwarding. It is not always true in reality, and no mechanism is defined on standard to reject the new call [1]. When IP backbone is congested, all ongoing service will be affected, IP QoS and IP CAC provide the reliability of call over the IP network [2]. For the career, in a mobile network, the IP QoS flow control ensures the quality of the IP bearer network [3]. In case of heavy traffic, the traffic can be efficiently distributed or subsequent calls are restricted so that the quality of established calls is maintained [4]. For the mobile subscribers the IP QoS flow control improves the quality of established calls. When the QoS alarm generates and flow control function is activated, some call will be released according to the parameter configuration. In order to reduce the risk in existing IP bearer network, it is better to implement CAC in low traffic time. Call Admission can be controlled based on Manuscript received October 19, 2012; revised November 25, 2012. Lushanur Rahman is with the Department of Electronics and Department of communication Engineering, Tampere University of Technology (TUT), Tampere FI-33720, Finland (E-mail: lushan05@yahoo.com) Molla Shahadat Hossain Lipu is with School of Environment, Resources and Development, Energy Field of Study, Asian Institute of Technology (AIT), Pathumthani 12120, Thailand (E-mail: lipuhossain@gmail.com) Rabiul Islam Jony is with the Department of Communications and Networking, AALTO University, FI-00076 AALTO, Finland (Email: rabiuljony@yahoo.com) Md. Rejwanur Rashid Mojumdar is with the Faculty of Engineering and Computer Science, University of Ulm, 89075 Ulm, Germany (E-mail: m.r.r.mojumdar@gmail.com) bandwidth or QoS or it simultaneously depends on both. If there is no available bandwidth or unacceptable QoS destination, CAC action will be launched in the network [5]. CAC action includes rejection of new call, reroute the call to TDM if available [2]. Organization of the rest of the paper is as follows: In section II and III, we discussed CAC enable Criterion and network scenario respectively. In section IV and V, we described the working principle of IP CAC in network and key parameters situation respectively. In section VI and VIII, we presented assumption and performance evaluation and testing. The paper ends with FDP and SDP value, call bearing alarm level control, conclusion and future work in section VIII, IX and IX respectively. This is our ongoing work here we simulated the result of packet Loss, call barring alarm level, call restriction percentage, call connection ratio, call success ration during CAC action, sub rotes overflow Items. In every case, the scheme is validated by simulation results. This paper mainly focuses on some important parameters such as CBAL, SDP and FDP required for implementation of IP CAC service. These parameters are based on real traffic scenario of a network operator. II. CAC ENABLE CRITERION AND ACTION Call attempt and termination between MSC servers are controlled by Bearer Independent Call Control (BICC) protocol. For bandwidth based CAC, MGW calculates the total bandwidth for the active call used. MGW compares the total bandwidth with the configured bandwidth [6]. If the total bandwidth is greater than the configured bandwidth, MGW will not assign the IP terminal for the call and the call will be rejected. Otherwise the call will be processed [7]. MSC Server monitors the sample call between different MGW. MGW calculates the IP QoS information according to the Real Time Controlling Protocol (RTCP). MGW periodically (5 seconds) reports the IP QoS information to the MSC Server through the monitoring sample call using the standard H.248 interface [8], [3]. MSC server will smoothly control the new incoming call using the QoS information. QoS detection on RTCP gives the information on time delay, jitter, and packet loss in the IP network. Reporting of Qos information related to IP bearer network to MSC server is done through Mc interface [3]. If overflow is detected, Flow Control initiates and improves the quality of established calls. Fig. 01 illustrates both bandwidth and QoS concept based action of CAC and its criterion in the mobile IP bearer network. Performance Evaluation and Deployment Testing of Call Admission Control in IP Bearer Network Lushanur Rahman, Molla Shahadat Hossain Lipu, Foisal Mahedi Hasan, Rabiul Islam Jony, and Rejwanur Rashid Mojumdar 123 DOI: 10.7763/IJCEE.2013.V5.678 International Journal of Computer and Electrical Engineering, Vol. 5, No. 1, February 2013