Dynamic behavior of slowly-responsive congestion control algorithms

The recently developed notion of TCP-compatibility has led to a number of proposals for alternative congestion control algorithms whose long-term throughput as a function of a steady-state loss rate is similar to that of TCP. Motivated by the needs of some streaming and multicast applications, these algorithms seem poised to take the current TCP-dominated Internet to an Internet where many congestion control algorithms co-exist. An important characteristic of these alternative algorithms is that they are slowly-responsive, refraining from reacting as drastically as TCP to a single packet loss.However, the TCP-compatibility criteria explored so far in the literature considers only the static condition of a fixed loss rate. This paper investigates the behavior of slowly-responsive, TCP-compatible congestion control algorithms under more realistic dynamic network conditions, addressing the fundamental question of whether these algorithms are safe to deploy in the public Internet. We study persistent loss rates, long- and short-term fairness properties, bottleneck link utilization, and smoothness of transmission rates.

[1]  Injong Rhee,et al.  TEAR: TCP emulation at receivers – flow control for multimedia streaming , 2000 .

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

[3]  Raj Jain,et al.  Analysis of the Increase and Decrease Algorithms for Congestion Avoidance in Computer Networks , 1989, Comput. Networks.

[4]  Min Sik Kim,et al.  Transient behaviors of TCP-friendly congestion control protocols , 2003, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2001. Conference on Computer Communications. Twentieth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Society (Cat. No.01CH37213).

[5]  Mark Handley,et al.  Equation-Based Congestion Control for Unicast Applications: the Extended Version , 2000 .

[6]  Jörg Widmer,et al.  TCP Friendly Rate Control (TFRC): Protocol Specification , 2003, RFC.

[7]  Yang Richard Yang,et al.  General AIMD congestion control , 2000, Proceedings 2000 International Conference on Network Protocols.

[8]  K. K. Ramakrishnan,et al.  A Proposal to add Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) to IP , 1999, RFC.

[9]  Deepak Bansal,et al.  Binomial congestion control algorithms , 2001, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2001. Conference on Computer Communications. Twentieth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Society (Cat. No.01CH37213).

[10]  Mark Handley,et al.  A Comparison of Equation-Based and AIMD Congestion Control , 2000 .

[11]  Mark Handley,et al.  Equation-based congestion control for unicast applications , 2000, SIGCOMM 2000.

[12]  Sally Floyd,et al.  Congestion Control Principles , 2000, RFC.

[13]  Deborah Estrin,et al.  RAP: An end-to-end rate-based congestion control mechanism for realtime streams in the Internet , 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).

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

[15]  V. Jacobson,et al.  Congestion avoidance and control , 1988, CCRV.

[16]  Donald F. Towsley,et al.  Modeling TCP throughput: a simple model and its empirical validation , 1998, SIGCOMM '98.