Spurious Retransmission Detection (SRD) with the TCP Echo Options draft-zimmermann-tcpm-spurious-rxmit Richard Scheffenegger <rs@netapp.com> Alexander.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
7. 7 Chapter 13 Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Retransmission and Time-Out.
Advertisements

Different TCP Flavors CSCI 780, Fall TCP Congestion Control Slow-start Congestion Avoidance Congestion Recovery Tahoe, Reno, New-Reno SACK.
1 Transport Protocols & TCP CSE 3213 Fall April 2015.
EE 4272Spring, 2003 Chapter 17 Transport Protocols Connection-Oriented Transport Protocol  Under Reliable Network Service  Design Issues  Under Unreliable.
TCP: Transmission Control Protocol Overview Connection set-up and termination Interactive Bulk transfer Timers Improvements.
Provides a reliable unicast end-to-end byte stream over an unreliable internetwork.
1 Evaluating F-RTO (RFC 4138) Markku Kojo, Kazunori Yamamoto, Max Hata, Pasi Sarolahti Draft available at:
End to End Internet Packet Dynamics Vern Paxson University of California, Berkeley Presented by Kiran Komaravolu.
Fundamentals of Computer Networks ECE 478/578 Lecture #21: TCP Window Mechanism Instructor: Loukas Lazos Dept of Electrical and Computer Engineering University.
School of Information Technologies TCP Congestion Control NETS3303/3603 Week 9.
Computer Networking Lecture 17 – More TCP & Congestion Control Copyright ©, Carnegie Mellon University.
1 Spring Semester 2007, Dept. of Computer Science, Technion Internet Networking recitation #11 TCP Eiffel (RFC 3522)
Transport Layer3-1 Congestion Control. Transport Layer3-2 Principles of Congestion Control Congestion: r informally: “too many sources sending too much.
1 Spring Semester 2007, Dept. of Computer Science, Technion Internet Networking recitation #7 TCP New Reno Vs. Reno.
1 Internet Networking Spring 2002 Tutorial 10 TCP NewReno.
1 Internet Networking Spring 2006 Tutorial 10 The Eifel Detection Algorithm for TCP RFC 3522.
1 Internet Networking Spring 2004 Tutorial 10 TCP NewReno.
TCP in Heterogeneous Network Md. Ehtesamul Haque # P.
Lect3..ppt - 09/12/04 CIS 4100 Systems Performance and Evaluation Lecture 3 by Zornitza Genova Prodanoff.
RFC 1323: TCP Extensions for High Performance
COMT 4291 Communications Protocols and TCP/IP COMT 429.
3: Transport Layer3b-1 TCP: Overview RFCs: 793, 1122, 1323, 2018, 2581 r full duplex data: m bi-directional data flow in same connection m MSS: maximum.
Principles of Congestion Control Congestion: informally: “too many sources sending too much data too fast for network to handle” different from flow control!
TCOM 509 – Internet Protocols (TCP/IP) Lecture 04_b Transport Protocols - TCP Instructor: Dr. Li-Chuan Chen Date: 09/22/2003 Based in part upon slides.
TCP1 Transmission Control Protocol (TCP). TCP2 Outline Transmission Control Protocol.
Networked & Distributed Systems TCP/IP Transport Layer Protocols UDP and TCP University of Glamorgan.
1 Transport Layer Lecture 10 Imran Ahmed University of Management & Technology.
1 89th IETF, London, UK TCP Timestamps revisited Mirja Kühlewind Richard Scheffenegger Brain Trammell tools.ietf.org/html/draft-scheffenegger-tcpm-timestamp-negotiation-05.
Forward Error Correction vs. Active Retransmit Requests in Wireless Networks Robbert Haarman.
Lecture 18 – More TCP & Congestion Control
Computer Networking Lecture 18 – More TCP & Congestion Control.
1 Computer Networks Congestion Avoidance. 2 Recall TCP Sliding Window Operation.
Internet Networking recitation #11
Transport Protocols.
IP Configuration API. Network Interface Configuration NAIfconfigIsDeviceUp() NAIfconfigDeviceFromInterface() NAIfconfigBringDeviceUp() NAIfconfigSetIpAddress()
Richard Scheffenegger (Editor) David Borman Bob Braden Van Jacobson RFC1323bis – TCP Extensions for High Performance 1 84 th IETF, Vancouver, Canada.
© Janice Regan, CMPT 128, CMPT 371 Data Communications and Networking Congestion Control 0.
TCP as a Reliable Transport. How things can go wrong… Lost packets Corrupted packets Reordered packets …Malicious packets…
Limited Transmit & Early Retransmit for TCP Bryan Youse CISC TCP/IP & Upper Layer Protocols October 23, 2008 See Also: RFC 3042 Hari Balakrishnan's.
Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) TCP Flow Control and Congestion Control CS 60008: Internet Architecture and Protocols Department of CSE, IIT Kharagpur.
Ch 3. Transport Layer Myungchul Kim
Ch 3. Transport Layer Myungchul Kim
Richard Scheffenegger Mirja Kühlewind TCP Timestamp Negotiation draft-scheffenegger-tcpm-timestamp- negotiation th IETF, Vancouver, Canada.
TCP over Wireless PROF. MICHAEL TSAI 2016/6/3. TCP Congestion Control (TCP Tahoe) Only ACK correctly received packets Congestion Window Size: Maximum.
Chapter 9: Transport Layer
Instructor Materials Chapter 9: Transport Layer
By, Nirnimesh Ghose, Master of Science,
Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) Retransmission and Time-Out
Internet Networking recitation #9
Introduction to Networks
Limited Transmit for TCP
Transmission Control Protocol (TCP)
Chapter 3 outline 3.1 Transport-layer services
TCP and SCTP RTO Restart draft-ietf-tcpm-rtorestart-01 TCPM WG IETF-88
Magda El Zarki Professor, ICS UC, Irvine
Limited Transmit & Early Retransmit for TCP
Introduction of Transport Protocols
TCP Extended Option Space in the Payload of a Supplementary Segment
Precept 2: TCP Congestion Control Review
Chapter 5 TCP Transmission Control
So far, On the networking side, we looked at mechanisms to links hosts using direct linked networks and then forming a network of these networks. We introduced.
CS4470 Computer Networking Protocols
Internet Networking recitation #10
Lecture 18 – More TCP & Congestion Control
A packet by packet multi-path routing approach
If both sources send full windows, we may get congestion collapse
TCP Overview.
Chapter 3 outline 3.1 Transport-layer services
Computer Networking TCP.
ECN in QUIC - Questions Surfaced
Presentation transcript:

Spurious Retransmission Detection (SRD) with the TCP Echo Options draft-zimmermann-tcpm-spurious-rxmit Richard Scheffenegger <rs@netapp.com> Alexander Zimmermann <alexander.zimmermann@netapp.com>

Problem Statement Eifel detection Uses TCP Timestamp options [RFC 7323] to detect spurious retransmissions Limited applicability due to TSecr semantics, and TSval granularity No detection of reordering during loss recovery Idea: Make every segment – including all retransmissions – uniquely identifiable (to the sender) Allows all functionality of Eifel, even during corner cases Enables new capabilities (lost retransmission detection)

Spurious Retransmission Detection (SRD) Mechanism Use TCP Echo Option to send a (small) counter in each segment to keep MSS equal for retransmissions Increase counter when sending a new round of retransmissions e.g. (re-)entering loss recovery Check counter in received ACK Equal to current value  valid retransmission Else spurious retransmissions Property Semantics of TCP Echo allows to determine the exact ordering of transmissions, even in case of reordering

Example (Semantics) RFC7323 TSecr reflects TS of last in-sequence segment Source Destination Source Destination S1, E1 S2, E2 S3, E3 A2, E1 A2, E3 A4, E2 S1, TS1 S3, TS3 S2, TS2 A2, TS1 S4, TS4 S4, E4 A2, TS1 A4, TS2 A5, TS4 A5, E4

Example (Eifel vs. SRD) Granularity of TS often too coarse S1, TS1 Source Destination Source Destination S1, TS1 S2, TS1 S3, TS1 A2, TS1 A5, TS1 S4, TS1 S1, E1 S2, E1 S3, E1 A2, E1 A5, E1 S4, E1 S2, E2 A5, E2

Example (Eifel vs. SRD) Eifel only works on first retransmitted segment Source Destination Source Destination S1, TS1 S1, E1 A2, TS1 A2, E1 S4, TS2 S4, E1 S5, TS2 S5, E1 S2, TS1 S3, TS2 S2, E1 S3, E1 S6, TS2 S6, E1 A2, TS1 A2, E1 A2, TS1 A2, E1 A2, TS1 A2, E1 S2, TS2 S2, E2 A2, TS1 A2, E1 A7, TS2 S3, TS2 A7, E1 S3, E2 A7, TS2 A7, E2 A7, TS2 A7, E2

Example (Eifel vs. SRD) Allows lost retransmission detection X X X X Source Destination Source Destination S1, TS1 S1, E1 S2, TS1 S2, E1 X X S3, TS2 S3, E1 A2, TS1 A2, E1 S4, TS2 S4, E1 S5, TS2 S5, E1 A2, TS1 A2, E1 S6, TS2 S6, E1 A2, TS1 A2, E1 A2, TS1 A2, E1 A2, TS1 S2, TS2 A2, E1 S2, E2 X X S7, TS2 S7, E2 A2, TS1 A2, TS1 A2, E2

Moving forward… Less overhead than RFC7323 Timestamps Solves the retransmission ambiguity problem completely More Complex scenarios involving Fwd Loss / Fwd Reordering / ACK Loss / ACK Reordering Enables Lost Retransmission Detection (LRD) while strictly adhering to packet conservation principles QUIC has similar “control sequence number” Next steps Received initial feedback (clarifications) Eventually asking for adoption