An large number of different caching mechanisms have been previously proposed 1 ,%DIFDELCMD < [%%% 3 , exploring different insertion and eviction policies , and the performance of networks of them have been analyzed in different ways. We review stationary Markovian models of caching networkswith independent incident (data) object demand processes and independent storing decisions (object insertion) and forwarding decisions (owing to cache misses) by the caches . We obtain a novel closed-form stationary invariant distribution for  LRU and MRU caching nodes , and numerically compare with a simple "Incremental Rank Progress" caching mechanism where cache hits result in slower progress through the ranks than LRU.
An large number of different caching mechanisms have been previously proposed %DIFDELCMD < [%%% \mbox{%DIFAUXCMD Aven87,Krunz04,Wikipedia-cache-replacement-policies exploring different insertion and eviction policies and their performance individually and as part of caching networks . We obtain a novel closed-form stationary invariant distribution for Markov model of a generalization of LRU and MRU caching nodes . Numerical comparisons are made with an "Incremental Rank Progress" (CLIMB) and random eviction/replacement methods under a Zipf popularity distribution. The range of cache hit probabilities is smaller under MRU and larger under IRP compared to LRU.
D
1
D
,
D
3
R
,
\mbox{%DIFAUXCMD Aven87,Krunz04,Wikipedia-cache-replacement-policies
R
, and the performance of networks of them have been analyzed in different ways. We review stationary Markovian models of caching networkswith independent incident (data) object demand processes and independent storing decisions (object insertion) and forwarding decisions (owing to cache misses) by the caches
and their performance individually and as part of caching networks
A
Markov model of a generalization of
R
, and numerically compare with a simple
. Numerical comparisons are made with an
R
caching mechanism where cache hits result in slower progress through the ranks than
(CLIMB) and random eviction/replacement methods under a Zipf popularity distribution. The range of cache hit probabilities is smaller under MRU and larger under IRP compared to