Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 55 views

    Understanding The Performance of TCP Pacing

    Uploaded by

    dk_mishra1989
    This document summarizes a research paper that evaluates the impact of pacing TCP packets across round-trip times. The key findings are: 1) Pacing TCP improves fairness and reduces packet drops when buffer sizes are small, but can lead to lower throughput initially for single flows. 2) For multiple flows starting simultaneously, TCP without pacing achieves better throughput initially while paced TCP performs better in steady state. 3) Pacing TCP achieves better fairness without sacrificing throughput for flows with different round-trip times. However, with mixed paced and non-paced flows, pacing tends to decrease performance for long flows.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Understanding The Performance of TCP Pacing

    Uploaded by

    dk_mishra1989
    55 views11 pages
    This document summarizes a research paper that evaluates the impact of pacing TCP packets across round-trip times. The key findings are: 1) Pacing TCP improves fairness and reduces packet drops when buffer sizes are small, but can lead to lower throughput initially for single flows. 2) For multiple flows starting simultaneously, TCP without pacing achieves better throughput initially while paced TCP performs better in steady state. 3) Pacing TCP achieves better fairness without sacrificing throughput for flows with different round-trip times. However, with mixed paced and non-paced flows, pacing tends to decrease performance for long flows.

    Original Description:

    TCP Pacing is a better option for high speed networks.

    Original Title

    Tcp Pacing

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a research paper that evaluates the impact of pacing TCP packets across round-trip times. The key findings are: 1) Pacing TCP improves fairness and reduces packet drops when buffer sizes are small, but can lead to lower throughput initially for single flows. 2) For multiple flows starting simultaneously, TCP without pacing achieves better throughput initially while paced TCP performs better in steady state. 3) Pacing TCP achieves better fairness without sacrificing throughput for flows with different round-trip times. However, with mixed paced and non-paced flows, pacing tends to decrease performance for long flows.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as ppt, pdf, or txt
    55 views11 pages

    Understanding The Performance of TCP Pacing

    Uploaded by

    dk_mishra1989
    This document summarizes a research paper that evaluates the impact of pacing TCP packets across round-trip times. The key findings are: 1) Pacing TCP improves fairness and reduces packet drops when buffer sizes are small, but can lead to lower throughput initially for single flows. 2) For multiple flows starting simultaneously, TCP without pacing achieves better throughput initially while paced TCP performs better in steady state. 3) Pacing TCP achieves better fairness without sacrificing throughput for flows with different round-trip times. However, with mixed paced and non-paced flows, pacing tends to decrease performance for long flows.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as PPT, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as ppt, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 11

    Understanding the Performance

    of TCP Pacing

    Amit Aggarwal, Stefan Savage, Thomas Anderson


    Department of Computer Science and Engineering
    University of Washington

    TCP Overview:

    TCP is a sliding window-based algorithm.


    Ack-clocking.
    Slow-start phase (W=2*W each RTT).
    Congestion-avoidance phase (W++ each RTT).

    TCP Burstiness:

    Slow Start
    Losses
    Ack compression
    Multiplexing

    Motivation:
    From queuing theory, we know that bursty traffic produces:

    Random

    Wo
    rst
    C

    ase

    Higher queuing delays.


    More packet losses.
    Lower throughput.

    Response Time

    Best Case

    Queue
    Capacity

    Load

    Contribution:

    Evaluate the impact of evenly pacing TCP packets


    across a round-trip time.

    What to expect from pacing TCP packets?

    Better for flows:


    Since packets are less likely to be dropped if they are not
    clumped together.
    Better for the network:
    Since competing flows will see less queuing delay and burst
    losses.

    Simulation Setup:
    4x Mbps
    S1

    R1

    5 ms

    B= x Mbps
    S pkts 40 ms
    Sn

    4x Mbps
    5 ms

    Jains fairness index f:


    f=
    ( xi)2
    n xi2

    ( xi RTTi)2
    n (xi RTTi)2

    Rn

    Experimental Results:

    A) Single Flow:
    case S=0.25*B*RTT
    TCP Reno due to its burstiness in slow-start,
    incurs a loss when W=0.5*B*RTT
    paced TCP incurs its first loss after it saturates the pipe, I.e
    when W=2*B*RTT
    As a result, TCP Reno takes more time in congestion avoidance
    to ramp up to B*RTT
    (paced TCP achieves better throughput only at the beginning)
    case SB*RTT
    (They both achieve similar throughput)
    The bursty behavior of TCP Reno is absorbed by the buffer and
    it does not get a loss until W=B*RTT

    B) Multiple Flows:
    50 flows starting at the same time. All flows have same RTT.
    case S=0.25*B*RTT
    (TCP Reno achieves better throughput at the beginning!)
    (Paced TCP achieves better throughput in steady-state!)
    TCP Reno Flows send bursts of packets in clusters; some drop
    early and backoff, allowing the others to ramp up.
    paced TCP All the flows first saturate the pipe. At this point
    everyone drops because of congestion and mixing of flows,
    thereby leaving the bottleneck under-utilized. (Synchronization
    effect)
    In steady state, all packets are spread out and flows are mixed;
    as a result there is a randomness in the way packets are
    dropped. During a certain phase, some flows might get multiple
    losses, while others might get away without any. (Desynchronization effect)
    case SB*D
    De-synchronization effect of Paced TCP persists.

    C) Multiple Flows - Variable RTT:

    50 flows starting at the same time. 25 flows have RTT=100 msec


    and 25 flows with RTT=280 msec.
    case S=0.25*B*RTT
    (Paced TCP achieves better fairness without sacrificing throughput)
    TCP Reno the higher burstiness as a result of overlap of packet
    clusters from different flows becomes visible. It has a higher drop
    rate at the bottleneck link while achieving similar throughput.

    case SB*D
    TCP Reno higher drop rate persists.

    D) Variable Length Flows:


    A constant size flow is established between each of 20 senders
    and corresponding 20 receivers. As a particular flow finishes, a
    new flow is established between the same nodes after an
    exponential think time of mean 1 sec.
    Ideal-latency: the latency of a flow that does slow start until it
    reaches its fair share of the bandwidth and then continues with a
    constant window. (just for comparison reasons)
    Phase1: no losses. Latency of paced TCP slightly higher due to
    pacing.
    Phase 2: S=0.25*B*RTT TCP Reno experience more losses in
    slow start; some flows timeout. Case SB*D this effect
    disappears.
    Phase 3: Synchronization effect of paced TCP is visible.
    Phase 4: Synchronization effect disappears because flows are so
    large that new flows start infrequently.

    E) Interaction of Paced and non-paced flows:


    A paced flow is very likely to experience loss as a result of one of
    its packets landing in a burst from a Reno flow.
    Reno flows are less likely to be affected by bursts from other
    flows.
    Result: TCP Reno have much better latency than paced flows,
    when both are competing for bandwidth in a mixed flow
    environment.
    If we continuously instantiate new flows, the performance of
    paced TCP even deteriorates more. New flows in slow start,
    cause the old paced flows to regularly drop packets, further
    diminishing the performance of pacing.

    Conclusion::
    Pacing improves fairness and drop rates.
    Pacing offers better performance with limited buffering.
    In other cases; pacing leads to performance degradation due to:
    1. Pacing delays the congestion signals to a point where the
    network is already over subscribed.
    2. Due to mixing of traffic pacing synchronizes drops.

    You might also like

    pFad - Phonifier reborn

    Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.

    Note: This service is not intended for secure transactions such as banking, social media, email, or purchasing. Use at your own risk. We assume no liability whatsoever for broken pages.


    Alternative Proxies:

    Alternative Proxy

    pFad Proxy

    pFad v3 Proxy

    pFad v4 Proxy