Improving Multiple File Transfers Using SCTP Multistreaming

We identify overheads associated with FTP, attributed to separate TCP connections for data and control, non-persistence of the data connections, and the sequential nature of command exchanges. We argue that solutions to avoid these overheads using TCP place an undue burden on the application. Instead we propose modifying FTP to use SCTP and its multistreaming service. FTP over SCTP avoids the identified overheads in the current FTP protocol without introducing complexity at the application, while still remaining “TCP-friendly”. We implemented FTP over SCTP in three ways: (1) simply replacing TCP calls with SCTP calls, thus using one SCTP association for control and one SCTP association for each data transfer, (2) using a single multistreamed SCTP association for control and all data transfers, and (3) enhancing (2) with the addition of command pipelining. Our experiments compared these 3 variations with the classic FTP over TCP. Results indicate significant improvements in throughput for multiple file transfers with all three of our variations. The largest benefit occurs for (3) FTP over a single, pipelined, multistreamed SCTP association. More generally, this paper encourages the use of SCTP’s innovative services to benefit existing and future application performance and presents the case for multistreaming.

[1]  Mark Allman,et al.  TCP Congestion Control with Appropriate Byte Counting (ABC) , 2003, RFC.

[2]  Joseph D. Touch Those Pesky NATs , 2002, IEEE Internet Comput..

[3]  Srinivasan Seshan,et al.  TCP behavior of a busy Internet server: analysis and improvements , 1997, Proceedings. IEEE INFOCOM '98, the Conference on Computer Communications. Seventeenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies. Gateway to the 21st Century (Cat. No.98.

[4]  Marc Horowitz,et al.  FTP Security Extensions , 1997, RFC.

[5]  J. Postel,et al.  File transfer protocol (FTP) , 1985 .

[6]  Joseph D. Touch,et al.  The TIME-WAIT state in TCP and its effect on busy servers , 1999, IEEE INFOCOM '99. Conference on Computer Communications. Proceedings. Eighteenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies. The Future is Now (Cat. No.99CH36320).

[7]  Steven M. Bellovin Firewall-Friendly FTP , 1994 .

[8]  Srinivasan Seshan,et al.  An integrated congestion management architecture for Internet hosts , 1999, SIGCOMM '99.

[9]  Sally Floyd,et al.  Promoting the use of end-to-end congestion control in the Internet , 1999, TNET.

[10]  Luigi Rizzo,et al.  Dummynet: a simple approach to the evaluation of network protocols , 1997, CCRV.

[11]  K. Claffy,et al.  Trends in wide area IP traffic patterns - A view from Ames Internet Exchange , 2000 .

[12]  Hari Balakrishnan,et al.  Network Working Group , 1991 .

[13]  Sally Floyd,et al.  The NewReno Modification to TCP's Fast Recovery Algorithm , 2004, RFC.

[14]  Roy T. Fielding,et al.  Hypertext Transfer Protocol - HTTP/1.0 , 1996, RFC.

[15]  Mark Allman,et al.  On the effective evaluation of TCP , 1999, CCRV.

[16]  Mike Hibler,et al.  An integrated experimental environment for distributed systems and networks , 2002, OPSR.

[17]  Jeffrey C. Mogul,et al.  Improving HTTP Latency , 1995, Comput. Networks ISDN Syst..

[18]  Robert Braden,et al.  T/TCP - TCP Extensions for Transactions Functional Specification , 1994, RFC.

[19]  Vern Paxson,et al.  TCP Congestion Control , 1999, RFC.