& Balancing Loss-Tolerance between Link and Transport Layers in Multi-Hop Wireless Networks Vijay Subramanian 1, Shiv Kalyanaraman 1 and K. K. Ramakrishnan.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
A Comparison of Mechanisms for Improving TCP Performance over Wireless Links Published In IEEE/ACM TRANSACTIONS ON NETWORKING, VOL.5 NO.6,DECEMBER 1997.
Advertisements

1 Improving TCP Performance over Mobile Networks HALA ELAARAG Stetson University Speaker : Aron ACM Computing Surveys 2002.
Improving TCP over Wireless by Selectively Protecting Packet Transmissions Carla F. Chiasserini Michele Garetto Michela Meo Dipartimento di Elettronica.
Primitives for Achieving Reliability 3035/GZ01 Networked Systems Kyle Jamieson Department of Computer Science University College London.
Principles of Congestion Control Chapter 3.6 Computer Networking: A top-down approach.
Hui Zhang, Fall Computer Networking TCP Enhancements.
1 Wireless Sensor Networks Akyildiz/Vuran Administration Issues  Take home Mid-term Exam  Assign April 2, Due April 7  Individual work is required 
Delay and Throughput in Random Access Wireless Mesh Networks Nabhendra Bisnik, Alhussein Abouzeid ECSE Department Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI)
Introduction 1 Lecture 14 Transport Layer (Transmission Control Protocol) slides are modified from J. Kurose & K. Ross University of Nevada – Reno Computer.
Shivkumar Kalyanaraman Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 1 ECSE-4690: Experimental Networking Informal Quiz: TCP Shiv Kalyanaraman:
Shivkumar Kalyanaraman Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 1 ECSE-6600: Internet Protocols Informal Quiz #07 Shivkumar Kalyanaraman: GOOGLE: “Shiv RPI”
Random Access MAC for Efficient Broadcast Support in Ad Hoc Networks Ken Tang, Mario Gerla Computer Science Department University of California, Los Angeles.
Transport Layer3-1 Congestion Control. Transport Layer3-2 Principles of Congestion Control Congestion: r informally: “too many sources sending too much.
A Layered Hybrid ARQ Scheme for Scalable Video Multicast over Wireless Networks Zhengye Liu, Joint work with Zhenyu Wu.
1 Internet Networking Spring 2003 Tutorial 11 Explicit Congestion Notification (RFC 3168) Limited Transmit (RFC 3042)
CS 268: Wireless Transport Protocols Kevin Lai Feb 13, 2002.
Week 9 TCP9-1 Week 9 TCP 3 outline r 3.5 Connection-oriented transport: TCP m segment structure m reliable data transfer m flow control m connection management.
1 Internet Networking Spring 2003 Tutorial 11 Explicit Congestion Notification (RFC 3168)
1 Chapter 3 Transport Layer. 2 Chapter 3 outline 3.1 Transport-layer services 3.2 Multiplexing and demultiplexing 3.3 Connectionless transport: UDP 3.4.
Data Communication and Networks
1 Spring Semester 2007, Dept. of Computer Science, Technion Internet Networking recitation #8 Explicit Congestion Notification (RFC 3168) Limited Transmit.
Reliable Transport Layers in Wireless Networks Mark Perillo Electrical and Computer Engineering.
CMPE 257 Spring CMPE 257: Wireless and Mobile Networking Spring 2005 E2E Protocols (point-to-point)
1 A Comparison of Mechanisms for Improving TCP Performance over Wireless Links Course : CS898T Instructor : Dr.Chang - Swapna Sunkara.
Lect3..ppt - 09/12/04 CIS 4100 Systems Performance and Evaluation Lecture 3 by Zornitza Genova Prodanoff.
CIS 725 Wireless networks. Low bandwidth High error rates.
CS640: Introduction to Computer Networks Aditya Akella Lecture 22 - Wireless Networking.
3: Transport Layer3b-1 Principles of Congestion Control Congestion: r informally: “too many sources sending too much data too fast for network to handle”
Transport Layer 4 2: Transport Layer 4.
Transport Layer3-1 Chapter 3 outline r 3.1 Transport-layer services r 3.2 Multiplexing and demultiplexing r 3.3 Connectionless transport: UDP r 3.4 Principles.
Networks Lab, RPI An End-to-End Transport Protocol for Extreme Wireless Network Environments Vijay Subramanian, Shiv Kalyanaraman (Rensselaer Polytechnic.
Networks Lab, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 1 LT-TCP: End-to-End Framework to Improve TCP Performance over Networks with Lossy Channels Omesh Tickoo,
Qian Zhang Department of Computer Science HKUST Advanced Topics in Next- Generation Wireless Networks Transport Protocols in Ad hoc Networks.
Improving TCP Performance over Mobile Networks Zahra Imanimehr Rahele Salari.
Improving QoS Support in Mobile Ad Hoc Networks Agenda Motivations Proposed Framework Packet-level FEC Multipath Routing Simulation Results Conclusions.
1 Disruption-Tolerant Link-level Mechanisms for Extreme Wireless Network Environments Vijay Subramanian 1, K. K. Ramakrishnan 2 and Shiv Kalyanaraman 1.
1 Impact of transmission errors on TCP performance (Nitin Vaidya)
Multicast and Unicast Real-Time Video Streaming Over Wireless LANS April. 27 th, 2005 Presented by, Kang Eui Lee.
CSE 461 University of Washington1 Where we are in the Course Finishing off the Link Layer! – Builds on the physical layer to transfer frames over connected.
Copyright © Lopamudra Roychoudhuri
Yufeng Shan, Su Yi, Shivkumar Kalyanaraman and John W. Woods
1 TCP - Part II Relates to Lab 5. This is an extended module that covers TCP data transport, and flow control, congestion control, and error control in.
1 University of Berne Institute of Computer Science and Applied Mathematics – IAM/RVS An overview on TCP in Wireless Ad hoc Networks Ruy de Oliveira March.
Analysis of TCP Latency over Wireless Links Supporting FEC/ARQ-SR for Error Recovery Raja Abdelmoumen, Mohammad Malli, Chadi Barakat PLANETE group, INRIA.
TCP-Cognizant Adaptive Forward Error Correction in Wireless Networks
Forward Error Correction vs. Active Retransmit Requests in Wireless Networks Robbert Haarman.
CS640: Introduction to Computer Networks Aditya Akella Lecture 15 TCP – III Reliability and Implementation Issues.
1 CS 4396 Computer Networks Lab TCP – Part II. 2 Flow Control Congestion Control Retransmission Timeout TCP:
Outline Wireless introduction Wireless cellular (GSM, CDMA, UMTS) Wireless LANs, MAC layer Wireless Ad hoc networks – routing: proactive routing, on-demand.
CS640: Introduction to Computer Networks Aditya Akella Lecture 15 TCP – III Reliability and Implementation Issues.
Low Latency Adaptive Streaming over TCP Authors Ashvin Goel Charles Krasic Jonathan Walpole Presented By Sudeep Rege Sachin Edlabadkar.
TCP OVER ADHOC NETWORK. TCP Basics TCP (Transmission Control Protocol) was designed to provide reliable end-to-end delivery of data over unreliable networks.
Ασύρματες και Κινητές Επικοινωνίες Ενότητα # 11: Mobile Transport Layer Διδάσκων: Βασίλειος Σύρης Τμήμα: Πληροφορικής.
Transport Layer3-1 Chapter 3 outline r 3.1 Transport-layer services r 3.2 Multiplexing and demultiplexing r 3.3 Connectionless transport: UDP r 3.4 Principles.
TCP/IP1 Address Resolution Protocol Internet uses IP address to recognize a computer. But IP address needs to be translated to physical address (NIC).
Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) TCP Flow Control and Congestion Control CS 60008: Internet Architecture and Protocols Department of CSE, IIT Kharagpur.
Networks Lab, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute 1 LT-TCP: End-to-End Framework to Improve TCP Performance over Networks with Lossy Channels Omesh Tickoo,
1 Ad-hoc Transport Layer Protocol (ATCP) EECS 4215.
Coding for Multipath TCP: Opportunities and Challenges Øyvind Ytrehus University of Bergen and Simula Res. Lab. NNUW-2, August 29, 2014.
Airmail: A Link-layer Protocol for Wireless Networks
TCP - Part II Relates to Lab 5. This is an extended module that covers TCP flow control, congestion control, and error control in TCP.
Internet Networking recitation #9
COMP 431 Internet Services & Protocols
Ad-hoc Networks.
Ad-hoc Transport Layer Protocol (ATCP)
TCP - Part II Relates to Lab 5. This is an extended module that covers TCP flow control, congestion control, and error control in TCP.
Internet Networking recitation #10
CS4470 Computer Networking Protocols
Chapter 3 outline 3.1 Transport-layer services
Impact of transmission errors on TCP performance
Presentation transcript:

& Balancing Loss-Tolerance between Link and Transport Layers in Multi-Hop Wireless Networks Vijay Subramanian 1, Shiv Kalyanaraman 1 and K. K. Ramakrishnan 2 1-(Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute), 2-(AT&T Labs Research) We gratefully acknowledge support from Air Force/ESC Hanscom and MIT Lincoln Laboratory, Letter No. 14-S

& 2 Multi-Tier NLOS MANETs & Meshes: Challenging Conditions for TCP/Link Layers Municipal Wireless Deployments / Community wireless networks / mesh networks will lead to poor performance caused by low SNR and high interference. Tropos, Google Wifi Dense wireless deployments in urban areas/ high rises will cause disruptions/ burst errors due to interference. Preliminary studies such as Roofnet have reported high packet losses. Protocols need to be loss tolerant and provide reliability

& 3 Protocol Objectives  Dividing the burden of reliability between link and transport layers –And also between proactive and reactive phases  Good performance over multiple hops even at high loss rates.  Delay Control –Link-latency should be as small as possible  Small Residual Loss Rate –Transport layer should be exposed to a negligible residual loss rate  High Link-level Goodput –Link-goodput determines user goodput and should be high –Translates to high Transport Layer Goodput Goodput Block recovery latency Residual Loss Rate Multi-way Trade-off

& 4 Building Blocks  Tools Available: –Forward Error Correction (FEC) »minimize wastage –Retransmissions (ARQ) –Loss Estimation »dynamically tune the FEC –Adaptive Granulation »How does varying the packet/fragment size at transport/ link layer help us? What is the right mix of mechanisms to achieve loss tolerance and robustness? What is the right mix of mechanisms to achieve loss tolerance and robustness?

& 5 LT-TCP, LL-HARQ Scheme Features  Loss Estimation using EWMA to estimate channel loss rate.  Data granulation and block construction –Block = Data + PFEC –RFEC stored for future use  Initial transmission consists of data + PFEC packets.  Feedback from the receiver indicates the number of units still needed for recovery.  RFEC packets are sent in response to the feedback.  If k out of n units reach the receiver, the data packets can be recovered.  LT-TCP at the transport layer and LL- HARQ at the link layer.  LL-HARQ operates with a strict limit of 1 ARQ attempt to bound latency.

& 6 Protocol Framework

& 7 Achieving Balance Between Transport and Link Layers  We seek to achieve a division of labor between the transport and link layers.  We want the link layer to do as much as possible. –But current link approaches work too hard trading off »Latency, due to high ARQ »Goodput, with non-adaptive and ad hoc FEC.  With LT-TCP + LL-HARQ –LL-HARQ works to minimize link residual loss rate but does not provide zero loss rate to TCP. –Over a single hop, residual loss rate is low enough for TCP-SACK to handle. –Over multiple hops, residual loss rate is too large for TCP-SACK. –LT-TCP, designed to be robust to loss can handle such scenarios. –LT-TCP + LL-HARQ give good performance even under worst case conditions.

& 8 Simulation Setup: 1-hop and 4 hops

& 9 Simulation Parameters  LL-ARQ is the baseline protocol and it differs from LL-HARQ in the following: –Number of ARQ attempts –FEC protection  Bursty Error Process: –ON-OFF loss model –Error Rate in ON state = 1.5 times error rate in OFF state –Example: 50% PER = 25% PER in OFF and 75% PER in ON states.

& 10 Link Level Goodput  Compare the performance at the link layer for the baseline transport protocol (TCP-SACK)  We see that LL-HARQ is able to significantly outperform LL- ARQ  Per hop link latency is much better with LL-HARQ than with LL-ARQ.

& 11 End-End Delay  We study the effect on the link protocol on the end-end RTT.  As seen, with LL-ARQ, per hop latency is high.  Over multiple hops, this translates to unacceptably high end-end delay.  The high service time of LL-ARQ translates to low transport goodput.

& 12 Transport Layer Goodput

& 13 Summary  Higher data rates/ smaller cells / dense deployments will lead to high packet loss rates on wireless networks.  We look at independent yet similarly designed protocols at the transport and link layers.  Key Goals: –High Link goodput  high transport performance –Low latency on link layer to keep end-end delay low on multihop paths. –Low residual loss rate desired  Key building blocks are –Loss Estimation –Data Granulation into Blocks –Adaptive FEC (provisioned as proactive and reactive) »No FEC provisioned if there is no loss –Tight Delay control at the link layer  Results show that LT-TCP and LL-HARQ complement each other to yield synergistic benefits. –Performance is better compared to TCP-SACK / LL-ARQ combinations.

& 14

& 15

& 16 File Transfer Latency

& 17 Link ARQ, FEC and Lossrate Trade-offs

& 18 Block Erasure Coding: Reed-Solomon FEC RS(N,K) Data = K FEC (N-K) Block Size (N) RS(N,K) >= K of N received Lossy Network Recover K data packets! Recovery possible if we receive at least K packets out of N Questions: In dynamic loss conditions… How to set N ? How to choose K? How to use this inventory of FEC effectively?

& 19 Loss Estimate FEC Computation (n,k) Loss Estimation MSS Adaptation Granulated Window Size Window Size Application Data P-FEC Data Window Putting it Together….

& 20

& 21 Transport Scheme (LT-TCP)  ECN-Only: We infer congestion solely from ECN markings. Window is cut in response to –ECN signals: which means that hosts/routers have to be ECN-capable. –Timeouts: The response to a timeout is the same as before.  Window Granulation and Adaptive MSS: We ensure that the window always has at least G segments at all times. –Window size in bytes initially is the same as normal SACK TCP. –Initial segment size is small to accommodate G segments. –Packet size is continually changed so that we have at least G segments. Once we have G segments, packet size increases with window size.  Loss Estimation: The receiver continually tracks the loss rate and provides a running estimate of perceived loss back to the TCP sender through ACKs. An EWMA approach with alpha = 0.5 is used.

& 22 Transport Scheme (LT-TCP)…  Proactive FEC: TCP sender sends data in blocks where the block contains K data segments and R FEC packets. The amount of FEC protection (K) is determined by the current loss estimate. –Proactive FEC based upon estimate of per-window loss rate (Adaptive)  Reactive FEC: Reactive FEC to complement retransmissions. –Upon receipt of dupacks, Reactive FEC packets are sent based on the following criteria. »Number of Proactive FEC packets already sent. »Number of holes still left in the decoding block. »Loss rate currently estimated.

& 23 Link Layer Scheme (LL-HARQ)  LL-HARQ is the proposed link protocol that is based on the framework and is designed to –Export loss residual loss rate even with ARQ =1 –Yield high link goodput and hence transport goodput –Keep link latency low (due to low ARQ)  Loss Estimation : –An EWMA approach with alpha = is used.  Block equals 1 frame divided into N fragments. N fragments comprise incoming data + computed PFEC.  Retransmission attempt of 1 (Total of 2 attempts)