1. My Experiences, results and remarks to TCP BW and CT Measurements Tools
Jiří Navrátil
SLAC

2. My interests concerns on
How to achieve full BW utilization
Analysis ofTools for BW estimation
New methods of CT detection

3. Inspiration
Les Cottrell IEPM metrics
Jin Gujun (LBNL) netest-2 recommendation
Feng Wu-Chun (LANL) simulations
Diana Katabi, Charles Blake (MIT) bottleneck detection

4. Area of saturation = area of full utilization
TCP windows size (not sufficient for HSL)
Parallel streams
combination

6. Plop – linux (LANL) 2x 22 Mbit, 4x24 Mbit, 8x24Mbit
Saturation point

7. Plop – linux (LANL) 2x 22 Mbit, 4x24 Mbit, 8x24Mbit

8. No big difference between speed for P2,P4,P8, ..
Plop – linux (LANL) 2x 22 Mbit, 4x24 Mbit, 8x24Mbit
No big difference between speed for P2,P4,P8, ..

9. Inflexion point
Plop – linux (LANL) 2x 22 Mbit, 4x24 Mbit, 8x24Mbit

10. Plop – linux (LANL) 2x 22 Mbit, 4x24 Mbit, 8x24Mbit

11. Why such distribution of throughput for individual streams ?

12. Internet path
Out In
Virtual queue

13. Problems of slow and high loaded lines
All parallel streams share same “virtual queue”
All “my traffic” share same queue with outside CT visible in statistics for “streams speed” visible in time reports (In iperf)

14. Plop – linux (LANL) 2x 22 Mbit, 4x24 Mbit, 8x24Mbit

15. Plop – linux (LANL) 2x 22 Mbit, 4x24 Mbit, 8x24Mbit

16. Why I cannot achieve more bandwidth with less streams?
Is there a CT ?
I don’t know !

17. Plop – linux (LANL) 2x 22 Mbit, 4x24 Mbit, 8x24Mbit

18. Plop – linux (LANL) 2x 22 Mbit, 4x24 Mbit, 8x24Mbit

19. Plop – linux (LANL) 2x 22 Mbit, 4x24 Mbit, 8x24Mbit

20. Plop – linux (LANL) 2x 22 Mbit, 4x24 Mbit, 8x24Mbit

21. The other TCP applications behave very similarly in same environment
Conclusion:
The other TCP applications behave very similarly in same environment
But not all applications are so aggressive as Iperf !

22. Used tools for BW estimations
Pathrate
Pathload
Iperf
Netest-2
Incite BWe
UDPmon

23. Short characteristic of methods
Patharate
+ accurate
- not very reliable, long run time
Pathload
+ accurate, fast, light
- limited range of operation ( < 155 Mbps)

26. Small comparisons

27. Short characteristic of methods
Iperf
+ reliable
- must be configured to use full BW and postprocessed
- heavy load of lines during operation
Netest-2
+ reliable, good reports
- must be configured to use full BW,
- accurate (different timing scheme)

28. Plop – linux (LANL) 2x 22 Mbit, 4x24 Mbit, 8x24Mbit

29. Plop – linux (LANL) 2x 22 Mbit, 4x24 Mbit, 8x24Mbit

30. Plop – linux (LANL) 2x 22 Mbit, 4x24 Mbit, 8x24Mbit

31. Plop – linux (LANL) 2x 22 Mbit, 4x24 Mbit, 8x24Mbit

32. INCITE: Edge-based Traffic Processing and Service Inference for High-Performance Networks
Richard Baraniuk, Rice University; Les Cottrell, SLAC; Wu-chun Feng, LANL
Incite
BW estimator

33. P2 P1
BWe ~f(VQ) =f(dTR) dTR <0,RTT>
dTS
(20 ms)
Time P1 P2 P1 P2
dtp2
dTR
RTT P1 P2
dtp1

34. Plop – linux (LANL) 2x 22 Mbit, 4x24 Mbit, 8x24Mbit

37. dt ~ F(VQ) ~ F(Internet)
freq= volume/dt
volume ~ pkt_length*8
dt ~ F(VQ) ~ F(Internet)
BWe=Mean(freq)
Open Problem
What is pkt_length?

38. Virtual queue All “my test traffic” share same queue with outside CT
(It means that delay caused to my pkts by VQ
is not dependent only on my pkt_lengths !)
The accuracy is dependent on knowlegde of
packet distribution on particular path.
The average packet length ~1000 bytes
gives reasonable results.
Virtual queue

51. Filtering & Averaging
ANL
Current/Average
CERN
Current/Average

54. Good Morning !

55. KPNQest
UK-problems

56. Load balancing on one path router

57. Incite CT detection CT = f (dTR)
INCITE: Edge-based Traffic Processing and Service Inference for High-Performance Networks
Richard Baraniuk, Rice University; Les Cottrell, SLAC; Wu-chun Feng, LANL
Incite
CT detection
CT = f (dTR)

59. MF-CT Features and benefits
No need access to routers !
Current monitoring systems for Load of traffic are based on SNMP or Flows (needs access to routers)
Low cost:
Allows permanent monitoring (20 pkts/sec ~ overhead 10 Kbytes/sec)
Can be used as data provider for ABW prediction (ABW=BW-CT)
We have 2 data points of CT per second !!
Weak point for common use
MATLAB code

69. MF-CT verification model
UDP echo
SNMP counter
CERN
SNMP counter
internet
SNMP counter
SNMP counter
IN2P3
SLAC
SNMP counter
MF-CT Simulator
UDP echo