1 / 20

FAST TCP: design and experiments

FAST TCP: design and experiments. Cheng Jin David Wei Steven Low. http://netlab.caltech.edu. ns-2 simulation. DataTAG Network: CERN (Geneva) – StarLight (Chicago) – SLAC/Level3 (Sunnyvale). average utilization. 95%. 1G. 27%. 19%. txq=100. txq=100. txq=10000.

varian
Download Presentation

FAST TCP: design and experiments

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. FAST TCP:design and experiments Cheng Jin David Wei Steven Low http://netlab.caltech.edu

  2. ns-2 simulation DataTAG Network: CERN (Geneva) – StarLight (Chicago) – SLAC/Level3 (Sunnyvale) average utilization 95% 1G 27% 19% txq=100 txq=100 txq=10000 Linux TCP Linux TCP FAST capacity = 1Gbps; 180 ms round trip latency; 1 flow C. Jin, D. Wei, S. Ravot, etc (Caltech, Nov 02) Performance at large windows 10Gbps capacity = 155Mbps, 622Mbps, 2.5Gbps, 5Gbps, 10Gbps; 100 ms round trip latency; 100 flows J. Wang (Caltech, June 02)

  3. ACK: W  W + 1/W Loss: W  W – 0.5W • Packet level • Flow level • Equilibrium • Dynamics packets Packet & flow level Reno TCP (Mathis formula)

  4. Difficulties at large window • Equilibrium problem • Packet level: AI too slow, MI too drastic. • Flow level: requires very small loss probability. • Dynamic problem • Packet level: must oscillate on a binary signal. • Flow level: unstable at large window.

  5. Problem: binary signal TCP oscillation

  6. Solution: multibit signal FAST stabilized

  7. Problem: no target • Reno:AIMD (1, 0.5) ACK: W  W + 1/W Loss: W  W – 0.5W • HSTCP:AIMD (a(w), b(w)) ACK: W  W + a(w)/W Loss: W  W – b(w)W • STCP:MIMD (1/100, 1/8) ACK: W  W + 0.01 Loss: W  W – 0.125W

  8. FAST Conv Slow Start Equil Loss Rec Solution: estimate target • FAST Scalable to any w*

  9. ACK: W  W + 1/W Loss: W  W – 0.5W • Reno AIMD(1, 0.5) • FAST Packet level ACK: W  W + a(w)/W Loss: W  W – b(w)W • HSTCP AIMD(a(w), b(w)) ACK: W  W + 0.01 Loss: W  W – 0.125W • STCP MIMD(a, b)

  10. FAST TCP • Flow level • Understood and Synthesized first. • Packet level • Designed and implemented later. • Design flow level equilibrium & stability • Implement flow level goals at packet level

  11. ~ Ack timescale ~ RTT timescale Ack timescale Data Control Window Control Burstiness Control Estimation TCP Protocol Processing Architecture

  12. Architecture Each component • designed independently • upgraded asynchronously Data Control Window Control Burstiness Control Estimation TCP Protocol Processing

  13. Dynamic sharing: 3 flows FAST Linux Steady throughput HSTCP STCP

  14. 30min queue Room for mice ! FAST Linux loss throughput HSTCP STCP HSTCP

  15. small window 800pkts large window 8000 Aggregate throughput Dummynet: cap = 800Mbps; delay = 50-200ms; #flows = 1-14; 29 expts

  16. HSTCP ~ Reno Jain’s index Fairness Dummynet: cap = 800Mbps; delay = 50-200ms; #flows = 1-14; 29 expts

  17. stable in diverse scenarios Stability Dummynet: cap = 800Mbps; delay = 50-200ms; #flows = 1-14; 29 expts

  18. Open issues • network latency estimation • route changes, dynamic sharing • does not upset stability • small network buffer • at least like TCP • adapt a on slow timescale, but how? • TCP-friendliness • friendly at least at small window • tunable, but how to tune? • reverse path congestion

  19. What can FAST do? • Networks that support large windows • Long latency • High bandwidth • Networks experience moderate packet losses • HTTP traffic • Low-bandwidthnetworks and LANs

  20. Acknowledgments • Caltech • Bunn, Choe, Doyle, Newman, Ravot, Singh, J. Wang • UCLA • Paganini, Z. Wang • CERN • Martin • SLAC • Cottrell • Internet2 • Almes, Shalunov • Cisco • Aiken, Doraiswami, Yip • Level(3) • Fernes • LANL • Wu

More Related