A Principled Look at the Utility of Feedback in Congestion Control

Networked applications are ubiquitous and their performance requirements are becoming increasingly stringent. Network congestion can seriously impact performance contributing to increased latency, packet loss and poor throughput. To address these problems, the networking community has come up with a large number of congestion control algorithms. Congestion control schemes developed over the past few decades can be classified into two broad classes: one based on an end-system's perception of network congestion and the other based on the network providing feedback to flows that pass through it. In this paper, we make the observation that the pure end-system based congestion control schemes are faced with the significant challenge of receiving ambiguous signals that make it difficult to infer where the congestion is occurring and if this flow is even the cause of that congestion. This ambiguity makes it difficult for pure end-system based control schemes to achieve fairness across different flows. Modern routers and switches in the meantime, have grown in computing capability and can generate fine grained feedback at line speeds for flows traversing them. We show that even relatively simple feedback generated in-network at the point of congestion eliminates the ambiguities faced by pure end-system based congestion control mechanisms, thus ensuring the network functions at the right fair and efficient operating point. We provide the theoretical underpinnings establishing the need for in-network feedback to enable the network to operate at a unique fixed point at the intersection of the desired fair and efficient operation regimes, and demonstrate through emulation experiments that our use of the well-established and studied PI-control for Active Queue Management and Explicit Congestion Notification meets the goals of low latency, high throughput and fine granularity control of the queue while achieving fairness.

[1]  Albert G. Greenberg,et al.  Data center TCP (DCTCP) , 2010, SIGCOMM '10.

[2]  Donald F. Towsley,et al.  On designing improved controllers for AQM routers supporting TCP flows , 2001, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2001. Conference on Computer Communications. Twentieth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Society (Cat. No.01CH37213).

[3]  Toke Høiland-Jørgensen,et al.  Flent: The FLExible Network Tester , 2017, VALUETOOLS.

[4]  Injong Rhee,et al.  CUBIC: a new TCP-friendly high-speed TCP variant , 2008, OPSR.

[5]  Vishal Misra,et al.  ECN or Delay: Lessons Learnt from Analysis of DCQCN and TIMELY , 2016, CoNEXT.

[6]  Vijay Subramanian,et al.  PIE: A lightweight control scheme to address the bufferbloat problem , 2013, 2013 IEEE 14th International Conference on High Performance Switching and Routing (HPSR).

[7]  David L. Black,et al.  The Addition of Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) to IP , 2001, RFC.

[8]  Larry L. Peterson,et al.  TCP Vegas: End to End Congestion Avoidance on a Global Internet , 1995, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun..

[9]  Van Jacobson,et al.  Congestion avoidance and control , 1988, SIGCOMM '88.

[10]  Minlan Yu,et al.  HPCC: high precision congestion control , 2019, SIGCOMM.

[11]  Amin Vahdat,et al.  TIMELY: RTT-based Congestion Control for the Datacenter , 2015, Comput. Commun. Rev..

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