18 Nov 2009 TCP VEGAS Mohammad AlKurbi CMPT – 771: Internet Architecture and Protocols.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Michele Pagano – A Survey on TCP Performance Evaluation and Modeling 1 Department of Information Engineering University of Pisa Network Telecomunication.

Advertisements

TCP/IP Over Lossy Links - TCP SACK without Congestion Control.

1 TCP Vegas: New Techniques for Congestion Detection and Avoidance Lawrence S. Brakmo Sean W. O’Malley Larry L. Peterson Department of Computer Science.

TCP Vegas LAWRENCE S. BRAKMO SEAN W. O’MALLEY LARRY L. PETERSON PRESENTED TCP VEGAS IN 1994 PRESENTED BY CHUNG TRAN.

TCP Vegas: New Techniques for Congestion Detection and Control.

24-1 Chapter 24. Congestion Control and Quality of Service (part 1) 23.1 Data Traffic 23.2 Congestion 23.3 Congestion Control 23.4 Two Examples.

1 Comnet 2010 Communication Networks Recitation 9 Fairness & TCP Congestion Control.

TCP Congestion Control Dina Katabi & Sam Madden nms.csail.mit.edu/~dina 6.033, Spring 2014.

Computer Networks: TCP Congestion Control 1 TCP Congestion Control Lecture material taken from “Computer Networks A Systems Approach”, Fourth Edition,Peterson.

School of Information Technologies TCP Congestion Control NETS3303/3603 Week 9.

TCP Variations Naveen Manicka CISC 856 – Fall 2005 Computer & Information Sciences University of Delaware Nov 10, 2005 Most slides are borrowed from J.

Transport Layer3-1 Congestion Control. Transport Layer3-2 Principles of Congestion Control Congestion: r informally: “too many sources sending too much.

1 Congestion Control Outline Queuing Discipline Reacting to Congestion Avoiding Congestion.

Computer Networks: TCP Congestion Control 1 TCP Congestion Control Lecture material taken from “Computer Networks A Systems Approach”, Third Ed.,Peterson.

Week 9 TCP9-1 Week 9 TCP 3 outline r 3.5 Connection-oriented transport: TCP m segment structure m reliable data transfer m flow control m connection management.

Simulation based analysis of FAST TCP using OMNET++ Umair ul Hassan.

1 Lecture 9: TCP and Congestion Control Slides adapted from: Congestion slides for Computer Networks: A Systems Approach (Peterson and Davis) Chapter 3.

TCP Congestion Control TCP sources change the sending rate by modifying the window size: Window = min {Advertised window, Congestion Window} In other words,

1 TCP Transport Control Protocol Reliable In-order delivery Flow control Responds to congestion “Nice” Protocol.

Congestion Avoidance and Control Van Jacobson Jonghyun Kim April 1, 2004.

Transport: TCP Manpreet Singh (Slides borrowed from various sources on the web)

Data Communication and Networks

TCP Vegas Brakmo & Peterson. No change in TCP spec, merely an alternative implementation –Changes needed only at sender side Main finding –Vegas achieves.

Networks : TCP Congestion Control1 TCP Congestion Control.

TCP-Carson A Loss-event Based Adaptive AIMD Protocol for Long-lived Flows Hariharan Kannan Advisor: Prof. M Claypool Co-Advisor: Prof. R Kinicki Reader:

Advanced Computer Networks: TCP Congestion Control 1 TCP Congestion Control Lecture material taken from “Computer Networks A Systems Approach”, Fourth.

TCP Congestion Control

3: Transport Layer3b-1 Principles of Congestion Control Congestion: r informally: “too many sources sending too much data too fast for network to handle”

Transport Layer 4 2: Transport Layer 4.

Transport Layer3-1 Chapter 3 outline r 3.1 Transport-layer services r 3.2 Multiplexing and demultiplexing r 3.3 Connectionless transport: UDP r 3.4 Principles.

Transport Layer3-1 Chapter 3 outline r 3.1 Transport-layer services r 3.2 Multiplexing and demultiplexing r 3.3 Connectionless transport: UDP r 3.4 Principles.

Much better than the old TCP Flavours 1Rajon Bhuiyan.

Principles of Congestion Control Congestion: informally: “too many sources sending too much data too fast for network to handle” different from flow control!

TCP Vegas Kulan Kao 2006/3/25.

指導教授：林仁勇老師學生：吳忠融 2015/10/24 1. Author Chan, Y.-C. Chan, C.-T. Chen, Y.-C. Source IEE Proceedings of Communications, Volume 151, Issue 1, Feb 2004 Page(s):107.

HighSpeed TCP for High Bandwidth-Delay Product Networks Raj Kettimuthu.

Transmission Control Protocol TCP Part 2 University of Glamorgan Networked & Distributed Systems.

What is TCP? Connection-oriented reliable transfer Stream paradigm

Transport Layer 3-1 Chapter 3 Transport Layer Computer Networking: A Top Down Approach 6 th edition Jim Kurose, Keith Ross Addison-Wesley March

CS640: Introduction to Computer Networks Aditya Akella Lecture 15 TCP – III Reliability and Implementation Issues.

TCP on Wireless Ad Hoc Networks CS 218 Oct 22, 2003 TCP overview Ad hoc TCP : mobility, route failures and timeout TCP and MAC interaction study TCP fairness.

TCP: Transmission Control Protocol Part II : Protocol Mechanisms Computer Network System Sirak Kaewjamnong Semester 1st, 2004.

1 CS 4396 Computer Networks Lab TCP – Part II. 2 Flow Control Congestion Control Retransmission Timeout TCP:

TCP End-To-End Congestion Control Wanida Putthividhya Dept. of Computer Science Iowa State University Jan, 27 th 2002 (May, 25 th 2001)

CS640: Introduction to Computer Networks Aditya Akella Lecture 15 TCP – III Reliability and Implementation Issues.

Transport Layer 3- Midterm score distribution. Transport Layer 3- TCP congestion control: additive increase, multiplicative decrease Approach: increase.

Jennifer Rexford Fall 2014 (TTh 3:00-4:20 in CS 105) COS 561: Advanced Computer Networks TCP.

1 Analysis of a window-based flow control mechanism based on TCP Vegas in heterogeneous network environment Hiroyuki Ohsaki Cybermedia Center, Osaka University,

Janey C. Hoe Laboratory for Computer Science at MIT 노상훈, Pllab.

TCP OVER ADHOC NETWORK. TCP Basics TCP (Transmission Control Protocol) was designed to provide reliable end-to-end delivery of data over unreliable networks.

TCP. TCP ACK generation [RFC 1122, RFC 2581] Event at Receiver Arrival of in-order segment with expected seq #. All data up to expected seq # already.

H. OhsakiITCom A control theoretical analysis of a window-based flow control mechanism for TCP connections with different propagation delays Hiroyuki.

© Janice Regan, CMPT 128, CMPT 371 Data Communications and Networking Congestion Control 0.

Congestion Avoidance Created by M Bateman, A Ruddle & C Allison As part of the TCP View project.

Sandeep Kakumanu Smita Vemulapalli Gnan

TCP Vegas Congestion Control Algorithm

TCP Vegas: New Techniques for Congestion Detection and Avoidance

Approaches towards congestion control

TCP Vegas: New Techniques for Congestion Detection and Avoidance

Chapter 6 TCP Congestion Control

COMP 431 Internet Services & Protocols

TCP Vegas: New Techniques for Congestion Detection and Avoidance

Chapter 3 outline 3.1 Transport-layer services

So far, On the networking side, we looked at mechanisms to links hosts using direct linked networks and then forming a network of these networks. We introduced.

Chapter 6 TCP Congestion Control

CS640: Introduction to Computer Networks

Transport Layer: Congestion Control

Chapter 3 outline 3.1 Transport-layer services

Presentation transcript:

18 Nov 2009 TCP VEGAS Mohammad AlKurbi CMPT – 771: Internet Architecture and Protocols

Introduction  Another congestion control algorithm.  Developed by L. Brakmo, S. O'Malley, and L. Peterson on  Objective  Anticipate congestion at early stage.  Increase throughput and decrease losses. 18 Nov TCP Vegas

Concept 18 Nov 2009 TCP Vegas 3  Enhances congestion control in TCP Reno:  Sending part only.  It does not change TCP specification.  Avoids/minimizes congestion by 3 mechanisms:  New Retransmission mechanism.  Congestion Avoidance mechanism.  Modified Slow-Start mechanism.

1.New Retransmission mechanism 18 Nov 2009 TCP Vegas 4  Fast retransmission is not used most of the time [2]:  Losses are so great, that three duplicate ACKs are not received.  TCP Vegas calculate an exact RTT time from a previous segment(Send, Ack received)  Timeout = one RTT.  A retransmission happen if:  [ time(ACK (Packet-n)) – time(Packet-n+1) ] > timeout(Packet-n+1). When  A duplicate Ack is received.  OR, a (1’st/2’nd) non-duplicate Ack is received after a retransmission.

1.New Retransmission mechanism (2) 18 Nov 2009 TCP Vegas 5 Host A Pkt-13 Rtt TCP Vegas Retransmission mechanism Host B time Packet 11,12 X ACK 11 Packet 13 Packet 14 ACK 12 Packet 15 D. ACK 12 Pkt-15 Rtt Re. Packet 13 TCP Reno’d wait for 3 rd D. Ack ACK 13 ACK 14 Re. Packet 15

1.New Retransmission mechanism (3). 18 Nov 2009 TCP Vegas 6  Reducing the number of duplicate ACKs unwisely from 3 to 2 or 1, can result in many unnecessary retransmissions.  TCP Vegas reduces congestion window for losses that happened at the current sending rate, and not at before higher rate.

2.Congestion Avoidance Mechanism 18 Nov 2009 TCP Vegas 7  Mitigate congestion to avoid losses (TCP Reno react to loss).  Expected = WindowSize / BaseRTT  BaseRtt: minimum RTT so far.  For every RTT, calculate the following:  Diff = Expected Throughput – Actual Throughput  If ( Diff < α) then increase CongWin linearly.  If ( Diff > β) then derease CongWin linearly.  Otherwise (i.e. α < Diff < β), no changes.  the algorithm is not in effect during slow-start.

TCP Vegas sending rate adaptation [2] 18 Nov 2009 TCP Vegas 8 Background traffic Shared Link utilization

TCP Reno Behavior 18 Nov 2009 TCP Vegas 9 TCP Reno Background traffic Shared Link utilization

3.Modified Slow-Start Mechanism 18 Nov 2009 TCP Vegas 10  Incorporated CAM mechanism into slow-start.  Increase CongWin exponentially every other RTT.  In between,  If ( Diff ≥ β : one router buffer size ), then switch from Slow-start mode to linear increase mode.  During Initial Slow-Start, doubling CongWin size on the next Rtt, may exceed available bandwidth, so:  Set CongWin Threshold based on the estimated available bandwidth.  Such technique is not included: It does not improve throughput. It does not help if two connections decided to send at once.

Performance Evaluation [2] (Under Internet Real Traffic) 18 Nov 2009 TCP Vegas 11  Under Real traffic (Internet):  (37% ~ 71%) higher throughput.  (49% ~ 83%) less loss/retransmission.

Performance Evaluation [2] (Under Experimental traffic) 18 Nov 2009 TCP Vegas 12  Fairness (Another metric factor: [0~1]):  By running 2, 4 and 16 connections sharing a bottleneck link, It turns that: Vegas f airness ≈ Reno.  Does Vegas impose on Reno ?

Summary 18 Nov 2009 TCP Vegas 13  TCP Vegas has better throughput/fairness [2,3] and decreases losses by:  Reducing time required to detect lost and retransmit.  Slowdown sending rate before losses.  Switch from slow-start to linear mode on the right time.  TCP Vegas does not gain improvement by imposing Reno.  TCP Vegas is as fair as TCP Reno.

References 18 Nov 2009 TCP Vegas L. Brakmo et al. TCP Vegas: New techniques for congestion detection and avoidance. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM ’94, pages 24–35, May, L. Brakmo and L. Peterson. TCP Vegas: End to End Congestion Avoidance on a global Internet. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 13(8):1465–1480,Oct J. Mo, R.J. La, V. Anantharam, and J.Walrand. Analysis and Comparison of TCP Reno and Vegas. In Proceedings of INFOCOM ’99, pages 1556–1563,March 1999.

Thank you 18 Nov 2009 TCP Vegas