1. 1 TCP Schemes Investigation in Wired and Wireless Hybrid Networks By Weiwei Hu and Wei Zha Dec. 8, 2004

2. 2 Outline Introduction Random Loss Model TCP-Jersey TCP-Westwood Performance Analysis Conclusion References

3. 3 Introduction Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) reliable end-to-end window based designed for the wired networks (no random packet losses): not fit for wireless network Application WWW - HTTP File transfer - FTP E-Mail - SMTP Remote access - Telnet

4. 4 Introduction (Cont.) Wireless networks: bursty and high channel error rates. Throughput decreases greatly. Extending TCP as used over the wired links to the wireless links may bring inefficient usage of bandwidth. The TCP protocol is still used to transfer data over the wireless link.

5. 5 Introduction (cont.) A lot of attention is currently being paid to the design of a better TCP scheme over wireless links. Difficulty in modeling the TCP protocol analytically Many of these studies are simulation based. Hard to obtain insight into the effects of particular parameters on the behavior of TCP using simulations with specific settings

6. 6 Random Loss Model Independent identically distributed (i.i.d ) The packet transmission time of the packets on both lossless and lossy link are exponentially distributed. The congestion avoidance phrase is modeled using probability. Correlated Hiding the losses from the transport layer and moving the problem to link layer Applicable on very low bandwidth wireless links cannot be used to model the fast-transmit and fast-recovery phrases

7. 7 TCP-Jersey Congestion warning marking function (RED and ECN) Routers can take part in controlling TCP transmission rate: active queue management (AQM) Random early detection (RED): AQM scheme implementation Explicit congestion notification (ECN): an extension to RED RED and ECN are sensitive to parameter settings Cause unsatisfactory TCP performance

8. 8 TCP-Jersey (Cont.) TCP-Jersey simplifies the marking function: use only one threshold (thresh) Marking all the packets with probability 1 if the average queue length exceeds the predefined threshold. Calculating the average queue length using a larger queue weight than the original ECN.

9. 9 TCP-Jersey (Cont.) Available Bandwidth Estimation Estimate the available bandwidth (Rn) for the TCP connection. ABE estimator: optimum congestion window Calculate the optimum congestion window (ownd) size once every RTT. L n : size of packet n; t n-1 : previous packet arrival time.

10. 10 TCP-Westwood A sender-side modification of the TCP congestion window algorithm improves upon the performance of TCP in wired and mixed network uses an end-to-end bandwidth measurement. The ACK-based measurement procedure filtering the ACK reception rate The effects of delayed and cumulative ACKs on bandwidth measurement

11. 11 TCP-Westwood (Cont.) Main idea: exploit TCP acknowledgement packets to derive rather complicated measurements. A source perform an end-to-end estimate of the bandwidth available along a TCP connection by measuring and averaging the rate of returning ACKs.

12. 12 TCP-Westwood (Cont.) Three types of filters actually used in the simulation: Original filter: current_bwe_ = current_bwe * fr_alpha_ + sample_bwe * (1 – fr_alpha_) Filter 1: current_bwe_ = current_bwe_ *.9047 + (sample_bwe + last_bwe_sample_) *.0476 Filter 2: (LPF) current_bwe_ = cureent_bwe_ *.93548 + (sample_bwe+ last_bwe_sample_) *.03225

13. 13 TCP-Westwood (Cont.) TCP-Westwood controls the window using end-to-end rate transmission to continuously estimate the packet rate of the connection at the TCP sender. It can reset the window to match available bandwidth, which makes it more robust to the random loss in wireless link. TCP-Westwood has many superior features which can handle losses caused by link errors or wireless channel conditions more efficiently than most of previous existing TCP schemes.

14. 14 Performance Analysis We chose TCP-Westwood as a starting point because of its similarity to TCP-Jersey. We tried to simulate TCP-Jersey in ns2. However, due to the opaque description for detailed mechanism in TCP- Jersey and lack of references, the implementation seems infeasible so far. Problem: The congestion warning part (how to define the proper thresh of average queue length). Thus, we simulate TCP-Westwood and all the other conventional TCP schemes in NS-2 network simulator.

15. 15 Simulation Environment The source connects to a wired based station via a 20 Mb/s error free link with 35 ms one-way delay. The base station is linked to the destination, a wireless mobile node, via a 2 Mb/s lossy channel with 1 ms delay. A single TCP connection running a long-live FTP application delivers data from the source to the destination. S BS D 20Mb, 35ms 2 Mb, 1 ms

16. 16 Bandwidth Estimation An effective way to calculate the congestion window size Control data traffic efficiently. Expecting TCP-Westwood can reach a good estimation for bandwidth so that the lossy link can be utilized as much as possible.

17. 17 Bandwidth Estimation (Cont.) When the simulation time is greater than 7s, the TCP Westwood reaches the max bandwidth utilization.

18. 18 Bandwidth Estimation (Cont.) The slow start threshold matches very well with congestion window settings.

19. 19 Goodput An explicit characteristic for TCP performance. The effective amount of data delivered through the network. Run the simulation for TCP -Tahoe, -Reno, New Reno, -Sack, and -Westwood respectively. Random link error rate varies from 0.001% to 10%. The simulation time is 60s.

20. 20 Goodput Performance (Cont.) The first point at link error rate 0.00001, all TCP schemes are closely match to each other, which means that they perform the same at nearly no loss rate condition. When the lossy rate increases, TCP Westwood outperforms other TCP schemes explicitly, especially when error rate increases to 0.001.

21. 21 Goodput Performance (Cont.) The buffer size is kept as a constant, B = 60pkts. TCP-Westwood varies almost linearly to track the bandwidth variations of the bottleneck. TCP-Westwood is a slightly better than other schemes.

22. 22 Packet Loss 3 rd dup Ack triggles a retransmission of packet #115000: Fast Recovery

23. 23 Packet Loss (cont.) The sending rate is slowed down: Congestion Avoidance phase

24. 24 Packet Loss (cont.) Reenter the Slow Start phase

25. 25 Conclusion Investigate the performance of the different TCP algorithm in a wired and wireless hybrid networks. Provide an analytical model for TCP-Jersey and TCP- Westwood. First, we started with TCP-Westwood to perform the simulation. Haven’t reproduced the TCP-Jersey so far in results of obscure description and lack of references. Limitation: Congestion Warning: restrict the threshold of marking algorithm. Cooperate ECN to mark the packets.

26. 26 Conclusion (cont.) Different TCP algorithms, namely, Tahoe, Reno, New- Reno, Sack, and Westwood are studied in the given simulation environment. According to the experiment results, TCP-Westwood operates more robust than other existing TCP schemes, which shows the benefits of the bandwidth estimation in wireless or hybrid networks.

27. 27 References 1) Kai Xu, Ye Tian, and Nirwan Ansari, “TCP-Jersey for Wireless IP Communications”, IEEE Journal on Selected areas in Communications, vol. 22, no.4, May 2004. 2) Gerla M., Sanadidi M.Y., Ren Wang Zanella, A. Casetti C., and Mascolo S., “TCP Westwood: Bandwidth Estimation for Enhanced Transport over Wireless Links”, IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference 2001, vol. 3, pp. 25-29, Nov. 200. 3) David D. Clark, and Wenjia Fang, “Explicit Allocation of Best-Effort Packet Delivery Service”, IEEE/ACM Trans. Networking, vol. 6, pp.362-373. 4) Farooq Anjum and Leandros Tassiulas, “Comparative study of various TCP versions over a wireless link with correlated losses”, IEEE/ACM Transaction on Networking, vol. 11, no. 3, June 2003. 5) A. Kumar and J. Holltzmann, “Comparitive performance analysis of versions of TCP in local network with a lossy link – Part II: Rayleigh Fading Mobile Radio Link”, Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, NJ, Tech. Rep. WINLAB-TR 129, Oct. 1996. 6) M.May, J. Bolot, C. Diot, and B. Lyles, “Reasons not to deploy FED,” Proc. Int. Workshop Quality-of-Service (IWQoS), 1999, pp. 260-262. 7) A. Chochalingam, M. Zozi, and R. R. Rao, “Performance of TCP on wireless fading links with memory,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. Communications, June 1998, pp. 595-600.

28. 28 References (Cont.) 8) V. Jacobson, “Congestion avoidance and control,” ACM Computer Communications Review, vol. 4, pp. 314-319, Auguest 1988. 9) C. Casetti, M. Gerla, S. Lee, S. Mascolo, and M. Sanadidi, “TCP with fast recovery”, MILCOM 2000, Los Angeles, CA, Oct. 2000. 10) A. Zanella, G. Procissi, M. Gerla, M. Y. Snanaddi, “TCP Westwood: analytic model and performance evaluation”, Technical Report, URL: http://www.cs.ucla.edu/csd/phus/pubs.html. 11) ns-2 network simulator. LBL, URL: http://www.msh.cs.berkley.edu/ns.http://www.msh.cs.berkley.edu/ns 12) TCP Westwood modules for ns-2. URL: http://www1.tcl.polito.it/casetti/tco- westwood.http://www1.tcl.polito.it/casetti/tco- westwood 13) K. Fall and S. Floyd, “Simulation-based comparisons of Tahoe, Reno, and SACK TCP,” ACM Computer Communication Review, 16:5-21, 1996. 14) C. Casetti and M. Meo, “A new approach to model the stationary havavior of TCP connections”, In Proc. of IEEE INFOCOME, pp. 367-375, Mar. 2000. 15) J. Mo, R. La, V. Anantharam, and J. Walrand, “Analysis and comparision of TCP Reno and Vegas,” In Proc. of IEEE INFOCOM, pp. 1556-1563, Mar. 1999. 16) J. Padhye, V. Firoiu, D. Towsley, and J. Kurose, “Modeling TCP throughput: a simple model and its empirical validation,” ACM Computer Communication Review, 28:303-314.