TCP-LP: a distributed algorithm for low priority data transfer

Service prioritization among different traffic classes is an important goal for the future Internet. Conventional approaches to solving this problem consider the existing best-effort class as the low-priority class, and attempt to develop mechanisms that provide "better-than-best-effort" service. In this paper, we explore the opposite approach, and devise a new distributed algorithm to realize a low-priority service (as compared to the existing best effort) from the network endpoints. To this end, we develop TCP Low Priority (TCP-LP), a distributed algorithm whose goal is to utilize only the excess network bandwidth as compared to the "fair share" of bandwidth as targeted by TCP. The key mechanisms unique to TCP-LP congestion control are the use of one-way packet delays for congestion indications and a TCP-transparent congestion avoidance policy. Our simulation results show that: (1) TCP-LP is largely non-intrusive to TCP traffic; (2) both single and aggregate TCP-LP flows are able to successfully utilize excess network bandwidth; moreover, multiple TCP-LP flows share excess bandwidth fairly; (3) substantial amounts of excess bandwidth are available to low-priority class, even in the presence of "greedy" TCP flows; (4) the response times of web connections in the best-effort class decrease by up to 90% when long-lived bulk data transfers use TCP-LP rather than TCP.

[1]  Raj Jain,et al.  A delay-based approach for congestion avoidance in interconnected heterogeneous computer networks , 1989, CCRV.

[2]  Jon Crowcroft,et al.  Eliminating periodic packet losses in the 4.3-Tahoe BSD TCP congestion control algorithm , 1992, CCRV.

[3]  QUTdN QeO,et al.  Random early detection gateways for congestion avoidance , 1993, TNET.

[4]  Sally Floyd,et al.  TCP and explicit congestion notification , 1994, CCRV.

[5]  Van Jacobson,et al.  Link-sharing and resource management models for packet networks , 1995, TNET.

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

[7]  Zheng Wang,et al.  An Architecture for Differentiated Services , 1998, RFC.

[8]  David L. Black,et al.  An Architecture for Differentiated Service , 1998 .

[9]  David D. Clark,et al.  Explicit allocation of best-effort packet delivery service , 1998, TNET.

[10]  Dynamics of IP Traffic: A Study of the Role of Variability and the Impact of Control , 1999, SIGCOMM.

[11]  Anja Feldmann,et al.  Dynamics of IP traffic: a study of the role of variability and the impact of control , 1999, SIGCOMM '99.

[12]  Scott Shenker,et al.  Endpoint admission control: architectural issues and performance , 2000, SIGCOMM.

[13]  Jean-Yves Le Boudec,et al.  Global fairness of additive-increase and multiplicative-decrease with heterogeneous round-trip times , 2000, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2000. Conference on Computer Communications. Nineteenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (Cat. No.00CH37064).

[14]  Injong Rhee,et al.  The incremental deployability of RTT-based congestion avoidance for high speed TCP Internet connections , 2000, SIGMETRICS '00.

[15]  Richard G. Baraniuk,et al.  Multifractal Cross-Traffic Estimation , 2000 .

[16]  Liang Guo,et al.  The war between mice and elephants , 2001, Proceedings Ninth International Conference on Network Protocols. ICNP 2001.

[17]  H. Balakrishnan,et al.  Dynamic behavior of slowly-responsive congestion control algorithms , 2001, SIGCOMM '01.

[18]  Deepak Bansal,et al.  Dynamic behavior of slowly-responsive congestion control algorithms , 2001, SIGCOMM 2001.

[19]  Donald F. Towsley,et al.  Inferring network characteristics via moment-based estimators , 2001, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2001. Conference on Computer Communications. Twentieth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Society (Cat. No.01CH37213).

[20]  Richard G. Baraniuk,et al.  Connection-level analysis and modeling of network traffic , 2001, IMW '01.

[21]  Darryl Veitch,et al.  High precision active probing for Internet measurement , 2001 .

[22]  C. Dovrolis,et al.  End-to-end available bandwidth: measurement methodology, dynamics, and relation with TCP throughput , 2002, SIGCOMM '02.

[23]  Manish Jain,et al.  End-to-end available bandwidth: measurement methodology, dynamics, and relation with TCP throughput , 2002, SIGCOMM 2002.

[24]  Gustavo de Veciana,et al.  Size-based adaptive bandwidth allocation: optimizing the average QoS for elastic flows , 2002, Proceedings.Twenty-First Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies.