Performance–Cost Trade-Off Strategic Evaluation of Multipath TCP Communications

Today's mobile terminals have several access network interfaces. New protocols have been proposed during the last few years to enable the concurrent use of multiple access paths for data transmission. In practice, the use of different access technologies is subject to different interconnection costs, and mobile users have preferences on interfaces jointly depending on performance and cost factors. There is therefore an interest in defining “light” multipath communication policies that are less expensive than greedy unconstrained ones such as with basic multipath TCP (MP-TCP) and that are strategically acceptable assuming a selfish endpoint behavior. With this goal, we analyze the performance-cost trade-off of multi-homed end-to-end communications from a strategic standpoint. We model the communication between multi-homed terminals as a specific non-cooperative game to achieve performance-cost decision frontiers. The resulting potential game always allows selecting multiple equilibria, leading to a strategic load-balancing distribution over the available interfaces, possibly constraining their use with respect to basic MP-TCP. By simulation of a realistic three-interface scenario, we show how the achievable performance is bound by the interconnection cost; we show that we can halve the interconnection cost with respect to basic (greedy) MP-TCP while offering double throughputs with respect to single-path TCP. Moreover, we evaluate the compromise between keeping or relaxing strategic constraints in a coordinated MP-TCP context.

[1]  L. Shapley,et al.  REGULAR ARTICLEPotential Games , 1996 .

[2]  Tutomu Murase,et al.  Improved data distribution for multipath TCP communication , 2005, GLOBECOM '05. IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference, 2005..

[3]  J. Sobel,et al.  STRATEGIC INFORMATION TRANSMISSION , 1982 .

[4]  Roger B. Myerson,et al.  Game theory - Analysis of Conflict , 1991 .

[5]  Ariel Rubinstein,et al.  A Course in Game Theory , 1995 .

[6]  Randall R. Stewart,et al.  Stream Control Transmission Protocol , 2000, RFC.

[7]  Mark Handley,et al.  Data center networking with multipath TCP , 2010, Hotnets-IX.

[8]  Pekka Nikander,et al.  End-Host Mobility and Multihoming with the Host Identity Protocol , 2008, RFC.

[9]  Janardhan R. Iyengar,et al.  Concurrent Multipath Transfer Using SCTP Multihoming Over Independent End-to-End Paths , 2006, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[10]  Jiwei Chen,et al.  Multipath TCP in Lossy Wireless Environment , 2004 .

[11]  Thierry Ernst,et al.  Multiple Care-of Addresses Registration , 2009, RFC.

[12]  Dilip Sarkar A Concurrent Multipath TCP and Its Markov Model , 2006, 2006 IEEE International Conference on Communications.

[13]  Mark Handley,et al.  Coupled Congestion Control for Multipath Transport Protocols , 2011, RFC.

[14]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  How bad is selfish routing? , 2000, Proceedings 41st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[15]  Edward W. Knightly,et al.  Opportunistic traffic scheduling over multiple network paths , 2004, IEEE INFOCOM 2004.

[16]  Ariel Orda,et al.  Topology Design and Control: A Game-Theoretic Perspective , 2009, IEEE INFOCOM 2009.

[17]  Guy Pujolle,et al.  A Cross-layer approach to optimize the performance of Concurrent Multipath Transfer in wireless transmission , 2009, 2009 2nd IFIP Wireless Days (WD).

[18]  Marcelo Bagnulo,et al.  Shim6: Level 3 Multihoming Shim Protocol for IPv6 , 2009, RFC.

[19]  Alan Ford,et al.  Towards Multipath TCP Adoption: Challenges and opportunities , 2010, 6th EURO-NGI Conference on Next Generation Internet.

[20]  Christos H. Papadimitriou,et al.  Worst-case Equilibria , 1999, STACS.

[21]  Mark Handley,et al.  Design, Implementation and Evaluation of Congestion Control for Multipath TCP , 2011, NSDI.

[22]  Mark Handley,et al.  Architectural Guidelines for Multipath TCP Development , 2011, RFC.

[23]  Eitan Altman,et al.  Correlated Equilibrium in Access Control for Wireless Communications , 2006, Networking.

[24]  David C. Parkes,et al.  The price of selfish behavior in bilateral network formation , 2005, PODC '05.

[25]  Elias Koutsoupias,et al.  On the Price of Anarchy and Stability of Correlated Equilibria of Linear Congestion Games , 2005, ESA.

[26]  R. Srikant,et al.  Multi-Path TCP: A Joint Congestion Control and Routing Scheme to Exploit Path Diversity in the Internet , 2006, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[27]  R. Rosenthal A class of games possessing pure-strategy Nash equilibria , 1973 .

[28]  Stefano Secci,et al.  Peering Equilibrium Multipath Routing: A Game Theory Framework for Internet Peering Settlements , 2011, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[29]  Stefano Secci,et al.  Strategic evaluation of performance-cost trade-offs in a multipath TCP multihoming context , 2012, 2012 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC).

[30]  Mark Handley,et al.  TCP Extensions for Multipath Operation with Multiple Addresses , 2020, RFC.

[31]  L. Shapley,et al.  Potential Games , 1994 .