Presented by: Peng Wang EE Department University of Delaware A Probabilistic Approach for Achieving Fair Bandwidth Allocation in CSFQ.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Balaji Prabhakar Active queue management and bandwidth partitioning algorithms Balaji Prabhakar Departments of EE and CS Stanford University
Advertisements

Using Edge-To-Edge Feedback Control to Make Assured Service More Assured in DiffServ Networks K.R.R.Kumar, A.L.Ananda, Lillykutty Jacob Centre for Internet.
Fair Queueing. Design space Buffer management: –RED, Drop-Tail, etc. Scheduling: which flow to service at a given time –FIFO –Fair Queueing.
RED-PD: RED with Preferential Dropping Ratul Mahajan Sally Floyd David Wetherall.
WHITE – Achieving Fair Bandwidth Allocation with Priority Dropping Based on Round Trip Time Name : Choong-Soo Lee Advisors : Mark Claypool, Robert Kinicki.
CSIT560 Internet Infrastructure: Switches and Routers Active Queue Management Presented By: Gary Po, Henry Hui and Kenny Chong.
Transport Layer3-1 TCP AIMD multiplicative decrease: cut CongWin in half after loss event additive increase: increase CongWin by 1 MSS every RTT in the.
Playback-buffer Equalization For Streaming Media Using Stateless Transport Prioritization By Wai-tian Tan, Weidong Cui and John G. Apostolopoulos Presented.
CS 268: Lecture 8 Router Support for Congestion Control Ion Stoica Computer Science Division Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences.
CS 4700 / CS 5700 Network Fundamentals Lecture 12: Router-Aided Congestion Control (Drop it like it’s hot) Revised 3/18/13.
Router-assisted congestion control Lecture 8 CS 653, Fall 2010.
Network Border Patrol Celio Albuquerque, Brett J. Vickers and Tatsuya Suda Jaideep Vaidya CS590F Fall 2000.
Advanced Computer Networking Congestion Control for High Bandwidth-Delay Product Environments (XCP Algorithm) 1.
TFRC for Voice: the VoIP Variant Sally Floyd, Eddie Kohler. March 2005, presentation to AVT draft-ietf-dccp-tfrc-voip-01.txt.
Ion Stoica, Scott Shenker, and Hui Zhang SIGCOMM’98, Vancouver, August 1998 subsequently IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking 11(1), 2003, pp Presented.
Max Min Fairness How define fairness? “ Any session is entitled to as much network use as is any other ” ….unless some sessions can use more without hurting.
XCP: Congestion Control for High Bandwidth-Delay Product Network Dina Katabi, Mark Handley and Charlie Rohrs Presented by Ao-Jan Su.
1 Core Stateless Fair Queueing Ion Stoica Hui Zhang Scott Shenker CMU CMU Xerox PARC CMU CMU Xerox PARC.
By Sam Rossoff. The Red Police Controlling High- Bandwidth Flows at the Congested Router By Ratul Mahajan Sally Floyd and David Wetherall.
1 Core-Stateless Fair Queueing: A Scalable Architecture to Approximate Fair Bandwidth Allocations in High Speed Networks Core-Stateless Fair Queueing:
1 Probabilistic Packet Scheduling (PPS) Ming Zhang, Randy Wang, Larry Peterson, Arvind Krishnamurthy Department of Computer Science Princeton University.
1 Minseok Kwon and Sonia Fahmy Department of Computer Sciences Purdue University {kwonm, All our slides and papers.
Proportional Bandwidth Allocation in DiffServ Networks Usman Raza Chohan
Analysis and Simulation of a Fair Queuing Algorithm
High speed TCP’s. Why high-speed TCP? Suppose that the bottleneck bandwidth is 10Gbps and RTT = 200ms. Bandwidth delay product is packets (1500.
A & M University1 Design, and Evaluation of a Partial State Router Phani Achanta A. L. Narasimha Reddy Dept. of Electrical Engineering.
1 Traffic Sensitive Quality of Service Controller Masters Thesis Submitted by :Abhishek Kumar Advisors: Prof Mark Claypool Prof Robert Kinicki Reader:
CS 268: Lecture 8 (Router Support for Congestion Control) Ion Stoica February 19, 2002.
1 Core-Stateless Fair Queueing: Achieving Approximately Fair Bandwidth Allocations in High Speed Networks Ion Stoica,Scott Shenker, and Hui Zhang SIGCOMM’99,
1 Probabilistic Packet Scheduling (PPS): Achieving Proportional Share Bandwidth Allocation for TCP Flows Ming Zhang, Randy Wang, Larry Peterson Department.
ACN: TCP Friendly1 Promoting the Use of End-to-End Congestion Control in the Internet Sally Floyd and Kevin Fall IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking May.
Active Queue Management Rong Pan Cisco System EE384y Spring Quarter 2006.
SACRIO - An Active Buffer Mangement Scheme for Differentiaed Services Networks Saikrishnan Gopalakrishnan Cisco Systems Narasimha Reddy Texas A & M University.
1 Core-Stateless Fair Queueing: Achieving Approximately Fair Bandwidth Allocations in High Speed Networks Ion Stoica,Scott Shenker, and Hui Zhang SIGCOMM’99,
Congestion Control for High Bandwidth-delay Product Networks Dina Katabi, Mark Handley, Charlie Rohrs.
Core Stateless Fair Queueing Stoica, Shanker and Zhang - SIGCOMM 98 Rigorous fair Queueing requires per flow state: too costly in high speed core routers.
Congestion Control for High Bandwidth-Delay Product Environments Dina Katabi Mark Handley Charlie Rohrs.
UCB Improvements in Core-Stateless Fair Queueing (CSFQ) Ling Huang U.C. Berkeley cml.me.berkeley.edu/~hlion.
Core Stateless Fair Queueing Stoica, Shanker and Zhang - SIGCOMM 98 Fair Queueing requires per flow state: too costly in high speed core routers Yet, some.
Advance Computer Networking L-5 TCP & Routers Acknowledgments: Lecture slides are from the graduate level Computer Networks course thought by Srinivasan.
Bandwidth partitioning (jointly with R. Pan, C. Psounis, C. Nair, B. Yang, L. Breslau and S. Shenker)
ACN: CSFQ1 CSFQ Core-Stateless Fair Queueing Presented by Nagaraj Shirali Choong-Soo Lee ACN: CSFQ1.
Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology Network Systems Lab. 1 Dual-resource TCP/AQM for processing-constrained networks INFOCOM 2006, Barcelona,
Worcester Polytechnic Insitute, Worcester, MA, USA1 Traffic Sensitive Active Queue Management for Improved Multimedia Streaming Authors: Vishal Phirke,
Stochastic Fair Blue: A Queue Management Algorithm for Enforcing Fairness W. Feng, D. Kandlur, D. Saha, and K. Shin Presented by King-Shan Lui.
Queueing and Active Queue Management Aditya Akella 02/26/2007.
9.7 Other Congestion Related Issues Outline Queuing Discipline Avoiding Congestion.
15744 Course Project1 Evaluation of Queue Management Algorithms Ningning Hu, Liu Ren, Jichuan Chang 30 April 2001.
Florida State UniversityZhenhai Duan1 BCSQ: Bin-based Core Stateless Queueing for Scalable Support of Guaranteed Services Zhenhai Duan Karthik Parsha Department.
Analysis of Buffer Size in Core Routers by Arthur Dick Supervisor Anirban Mahanti.
We used ns-2 network simulator [5] to evaluate RED-DT and compare its performance to RED [1], FRED [2], LQD [3], and CHOKe [4]. All simulation scenarios.
1 Core-Stateless Fair Queueing: A Scalable Architecture to Approximate Fair Bandwidth Allocations in High Speed Networks Core-Stateless Fair Queueing:
XCP: eXplicit Control Protocol Dina Katabi MIT Lab for Computer Science
Congestion Avoidance Created by M Bateman, A Ruddle & C Allison As part of the TCP View project.
SRED: Stabilized RED T. Ott, T.V. Lakshman, L. Wong Presented by King-Shan Lui.
Univ. of TehranIntroduction to Computer Network1 An Introduction Computer Networks An Introduction to Computer Networks University of Tehran Dept. of EE.
1 Lecture 15 Internet resource allocation and QoS Resource Reservation Protocol Integrated Services Differentiated Services.
Internet Quality of Service
Internet Quality of Service
Corelite Architecture: Achieving Rated Weight Fairness
Mrinalini Sawhney CS-710 Presentation 2006/09/12
Core-Stateless Fair Queueing: A Scalable Architecture to Approximate Fair Bandwidth Allocations in High Speed Networks Ion Stoica, Scott Shenker, and Hui.
Columbia University in the city of New York
EE 122: Router Support for Congestion Control: RED and Fair Queueing
TCP, XCP and Fair Queueing
Advance Computer Networking
Max Min Fairness How define fairness?
Advance Computer Networking
Understanding Congestion Control Mohammad Alizadeh Fall 2018
15-744: Computer Networking
Presentation transcript:

Presented by: Peng Wang EE Department University of Delaware A Probabilistic Approach for Achieving Fair Bandwidth Allocation in CSFQ

Background Why need fairness? –Ill-behaved flows consume most of the resource –Well-behaved flows are starved out Three approaches for fairness –Stateful solution: (Fair Queueing) Each router maintains per-state information and operates on per-state basis Good performance Scalability problem –Stateless solution: (CHOKe) No per-flow information Approximately fairness –Partial State solution: (CSFQ, RAINBOW, SRED) Partial State information Approximately fairness (Generally better than stateless solution) Complexity between stateful solution and stateless solution

Fair Queueing Disadvantage: Need to perform packet classification and maintain state and buffers on per-flow basis and perform operations on per-flow basis

The CSFQ (core stateless FQ) Approach Goal: Achieve approximately fair bandwidth allocation Differentiate between Edge router and Core router Edge router maintains per-flow state Core router is stateless

Assume that flow i has arrival rate r i (t) and the fair rate is α(t). If r i (t) < α(t), all of its traffic is forwarded. If r i (t) > α(t), then a fraction (r i (t) - α(t))/ r i (t) will be dropped; each packet of the flow is dropped with probability (1- α(t)/r i (t)). CSFQ In an island of routers, edge routers measure per-flow rate and label the packets with these measures. Routers drop packets probabilistically based on the per- flow state in the packet header and fair share estimation

CSFQ The problem now becomes how to calculate the flow rate r i (t) values and the fair rate a(t), without keeping per flow state in the core routers. Flow rates r i (t), are calculated at edge routers which keep per flow state and then insert the rate value inside the packet header of packets belonging to that flow. Estimation of flow arrival rates: R new = (1-e -T/K )*l/T + e -T/K *R old where T = packet interarrival time l = packet size K = constant

CSFQ: Estimate fair rate (Heuristic) To estimate the fair rate α (t), an iterative procedure is used: routers meausre aggregate arrival rate A and the aggregate accepted rate F. (arrival packets dropped packets accepted packets). Based on these, the fair rate a is computed periodically as: - Uncongested: A< C at all times during a time interval of length Kc. then a is set to the maximum r i (t) during Kc - Congested: A > C at all times during a time interval of length Kc. then a new = a old *C/F - Normal: others NormalUncongCong A<C during Kc Update α and return immediately: α=max(p.label) during Kc A>C during Kc Update α and return immediately: α= α*C/F Fig: FSM for fair share estimation in CSFQ

Zombie List –A list of M recently seen packets –Longer memory than the buffer alone P i : Probability that arrival packet belongs to flow i –Assume P i doesn’t change in a limited time interval Hit SRED: Some Definitions Zombie List n incoming packets

SRED: Estimate fair share Symmetric case: N flows, pi = 1/N –ΣPi 2 = 1/N (exact estimate)  m/n=1/N  N=n/m Asymmetric case: N ≈ 1/ ΣPi 2 = n/m good estimation Zombie List n incoming packets Pi Pi: random select a packet Hit prob for flow i:Pi 2 Hit prob: ΣPi 2 # of hits: m = n ΣPi 2 ΣPi 2 =m/n 1/N=<ΣPi 2 < 1 n: sample size After n packets arrives, the estimation of fair share is updated. Fair Share = C/N where N ≈ n/m

Simulations – Single Congested Link (ALL UDP) Mbps UDP Flows

ALL UDPs: Fair Share Estimation Ns-2.1b7aNs-2.27

ALL UDPs: Throughput of each flow Ns-2.1b7aNs-2.27

Simulations – Single Congested Link (ONE UDP) Mbps TCP Flows UDP Flow UDP flows at 10Mbps 10Mbps

ONE UDP: Fair Share Estimation Ns-2.1b7aNs-2.27 congested--->α= , C/F= congested--->α= , C/F= congested--->α= , C/F= congested--->α= , C/F= congested--->α= , C/F= congested--->α= , C/F= congested--->α= , C/F= congested--->α= , C/F=

ONE UDP: Throughput of each flow Ns-2.1b7aNs-2.27

Further work: Make clear the confusion of NS2 version Optimize my fair share estimation Flows with different RTT Multiple congested links Web traffic THANKS !!!