We introduce STBL, a flow control algorithm that uses both window and rate to regulate traffic with smoothed transmission and bounded loss, as well as to compete fairly with TCP traffic. In this paper, we evaluate how STBL behaves as part of a ACK-based reliable multicast transport protocol (TRAM), based on a simulation model. A library of standard reference scenarios is used to drive the simulation. The results are quite promising. 1.0 Introduction The primary benefit of reliable multicast is that it offers an efficient way of disseminating information to many locations (almost) simultaneously. Both error control and flow control in reliable multicast (RM) are difficult problems. The difficulty with error control is that the need to process ACKs (or NACKs) from multiple receivers can create an implosion at the sender as the number of receivers increases. There are many proposals for reliable multicast transport protocols, driven by different application requirements in the areas of: reliability, scalability and performance. These approaches have been reviewed and discussed in [SURVEY]. The problems with flow control are many-fold. Scalability is one of the problems: as the number of receivers increases, the range of suitable transmission rates diminishes and it becomes increasingly difficult to aggregate feedback signals from the receivers. Another problem is with fairness: it is strongly argued that multicast flows must be TCP-friendly which, depending on how religiously you conform, can make flow control more challenging. During periods of congestion, a multicast flow’s repair (retransmission) traffic may come from different nodes, making it harder for the sender take it into account. The following are some of the key factors affecting the design of the flow and congestion control algorithm: • If and how the sender gets feedback information from the receivers • Whether the control is window or rate based • Whether there are external knobs that are used to indicate application requirements and performance guarantees agreed to out-of-band • What the fairness goals are The answers to some of these questions depend on the algorithm used to support reliability; for example, whether it is ACK-based or NACK-based. The issue of fairness hinges on larger issues of network resource allocation in the Internet, as is discussed below. In an ACK-based protocol, there is regular feedback from the receivers to the sender for error control purposes. This feedback channel can be used to piggyback flow and congestion information as well, so it is natural to incorporate a flow control algorithm that responds to such feedback information continuously. In a 1 We assume this needs no definition. For example, TCP uses a window-based flow control scheme. Some of the transports proposed for ATM networks use rate-based flow control.
[1]
Donald F. Towsley,et al.
The loss path multiplicity problem in multicast congestion control
,
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).
[2]
Brian Whetten,et al.
A Rate Based Congestion Control Scheme for Reliable Multicast
,
1998
.
[3]
Krishan K. Sabnani,et al.
Fundamental observations on multicast congestion control 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).
[4]
Todd Montgomery,et al.
A Loss Tolerant Rate Controller for Reliable Multicast
,
1997
.
[5]
Kevin R. Fall,et al.
Ns: notes and documentation
,
1997
.
[6]
Mischa Schwartz,et al.
Achieving bounded fairness for multicast and TCP traffic in the Internet
,
1998,
SIGCOMM '98.
[7]
Dah Ming Chiu,et al.
TRAM: A Tree-based Reliable Multicast Protocol
,
1998
.
[8]
S. Floyd,et al.
Tcp-friendly unicast rate-based flow control
,
1997
.
[9]
J. J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves,et al.
A comparison of known classes of reliable multicast protocols
,
1996,
Proceedings of 1996 International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP-96).
[10]
Jon Crowcroft,et al.
TCP-like congestion control for layered multicast data transfer
,
1998,
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.
[11]
Mark Handley,et al.
Strawman Specification for TCP Friendly ( Reliable ) Multicast Congestion Control ( TFMCC )
,
1998
.
[12]
Sally Floyd,et al.
Promoting the use of end-to-end congestion control in the Internet
,
1999,
TNET.
[13]
Scott O. Bradner,et al.
IETF Criteria for Evaluating Reliable Multicast Transport and Application Protocols
,
1998,
RFC.
[14]
Donald F. Towsley,et al.
Modeling TCP throughput: a simple model and its empirical validation
,
1998,
SIGCOMM '98.
[15]
Matthew Mathis,et al.
The macroscopic behavior of the TCP congestion avoidance algorithm
,
1997,
CCRV.