An accumulation-based, closed-loop scheme for expected minimum rate and weighted rate services

Abstract Traditionally QoS capabilities have been constructed out of open-loop building blocks such as packet schedulers and traffic conditioners. In this paper, we consider closed-loop techniques to achieve a range of service differentiation capabilities. We use an accumulation-based congestion control scheme [Y. Xia, D. Harrison, S. Kalyanaraman, K. Ramachandran, A. Venkatesan, An accumulation-based congestion control model, in: IEEE International Conference on Communications, Anchorage, Alaska, May 2003] as a data-plane building block to provide an expected minimum rate service that is similar to ATM ABR, Frame Relay CIR/PIR and DiffServ assured service and a weighted rate service that achieves a significantly larger range than the loss-based approaches that extend TCP [ACM Computer Communication Review 28 (3) (1998); T. Nandagopal et al., Scalable service differentiation using purely end-to-end mechanisms: features and limitations, IPQoS'00, June 2000]. The central theme is to allocate router buffer space among competing flows in a distributed manner to meet the rate differentiation objectives. Be cause both services are provided using congestion control mechanisms, they are meaningful in steady state and can be modelled as moving the equilibrium in Kelly's nonlinear optimization framework [Journal of the Operational Research Society 49 (1998) 237]. This scheme needs no admission control; instead, during oversubscription it degrades to a well-defined, policy-controlled bandwidth allocation. It does not require Active Queue Management (AQM) at bottlenecks with sufficient buffer. However, with AQM, we achieve near zero queue with high utilization at bottlenecks. We use ns-2 simulations and Linux kernel implementation experiments to demonstrate the performance of the services. Some practical issues and open questions are also discussed.

[1]  Kang-Won Lee,et al.  Scalable service differentiation using purely end-to-end mechanisms: features and limitations , 2004, Comput. Networks.

[2]  Steven H. Low,et al.  Stabilized Vegas , 2003, IEEE INFOCOM 2003. Twenty-second Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37428).

[3]  Jean C. Walrand,et al.  Fair end-to-end window-based congestion control , 2000, TNET.

[4]  Laurent Massoulié,et al.  Bandwidth sharing: objectives and algorithms , 2002, TNET.

[5]  Raghupathy Sivakumar,et al.  On achieving weighted service differentiation: an end-to-end perspective , 2003, IWQoS'03.

[6]  Scott Shenker,et al.  Analysis and simulation of a fair queueing algorithm , 1989, SIGCOMM 1989.

[7]  R. Srikant,et al.  End-to-end congestion control schemes: utility functions, random losses and ECN marks , 2000, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2000. Conference on Computer Communications. Nineteenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (Cat. No.00CH37064).

[8]  Eddie Kohler,et al.  The Click modular router , 1999, SOSP.

[9]  Jon Crowcroft,et al.  Differentiated end-to-end Internet services using a weighted proportional fair sharing TCP , 1998, CCRV.

[10]  Paul Barford,et al.  A performance evaluation of hyper text transfer protocols , 1999, SIGMETRICS '99.

[11]  Scott Shenker,et al.  Analysis and simulation of a fair queueing algorithm , 1989, SIGCOMM '89.

[12]  Frank Kelly,et al.  Rate control for communication networks: shadow prices, proportional fairness and stability , 1998, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[13]  Abhay Parekh,et al.  A generalized processor sharing approach to flow control in integrated services networks: the single-node case , 1993, TNET.

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

[15]  Abhay Parekh,et al.  A generalized processor sharing approach to flow control in integrated services networks-the single node case , 1992, [Proceedings] IEEE INFOCOM '92: The Conference on Computer Communications.

[16]  R. Srikant,et al.  Analysis and design of an adaptive virtual queue (AVQ) algorithm for active queue management , 2001, SIGCOMM '01.

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

[18]  Larry L. Peterson,et al.  Understanding TCP Vegas: a duality model , 2001, JACM.

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

[20]  Raj Jain,et al.  The ERICA switch algorithm for ABR traffic management in ATM networks , 1998, TNET.

[21]  Steven H. Low,et al.  Optimization flow control—I: basic algorithm and convergence , 1999, TNET.

[22]  David Harrison,et al.  An accumulation-based congestion control model , 2003, IEEE International Conference on Communications, 2003. ICC '03..

[23]  Scott Shenker,et al.  Integrated Services in the Internet Architecture : an Overview Status of this Memo , 1994 .

[24]  Ion Stoica,et al.  Stateless Core: A Scalable Approach for Quality of Service in the Internet , 2004, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[25]  Steven H. Low,et al.  REM: active queue management , 2001, IEEE Netw..

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

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

[28]  David Harrison,et al.  Accumulation-based congestion control , 2005, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

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

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

[31]  David Harrison,et al.  Edge-to-edge control: a congestion avoidance and service differentiation architecture for the internet , 2002 .