跳到主要內容

臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

(52.203.18.65) 您好!臺灣時間:2022/01/19 15:27
字體大小: 字級放大   字級縮小   預設字形  
回查詢結果 :::

詳目顯示

: 
twitterline
研究生:簡士哲
研究生(外文):Shih-Che Chien
論文名稱:一些TCP-友善擁塞控制機制
論文名稱(外文):Some TCP-friendly Congestion Control Mechanisms
指導教授:賴源正賴源正引用關係
指導教授(外文):Yuan-Cheng Lai
學位類別:碩士
校院名稱:國立成功大學
系所名稱:資訊工程學系碩博士班
學門:工程學門
學類:電資工程學類
論文種類:學術論文
論文出版年:2002
畢業學年度:90
語文別:英文
論文頁數:68
中文關鍵詞:TFRCTEARTCP擁塞控制演算法TCP-友善Vegas
外文關鍵詞:TCP congestion controlTCP-friendlyTFRCVegasTEAR
相關次數:
  • 被引用被引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:286
  • 評分評分:
  • 下載下載:38
  • 收藏至我的研究室書目清單書目收藏:1
隨著網路頻寬的增加,在網際網路上有越來越多的多媒體應用,由於TCP擁塞控制會造成的不穩定的流量,故僅適用於盡力式的資料流,而不適用於這些多媒體應用。
本論文首先介紹兩種TCP-友善的通訊協定,簡稱TFRC和TEAR,它們擁有跟TCP有相似的效能,並利用歷史遞減的平均遺失間隔的方法來避免傳送的速率振動過大,但此法中的權重參數不易設定,因此我們提出一個稱為鬆弛項(Slack Term)的方法,來使TCP-友善的通訊協定可以保證傳送速率的平穩,同時在長時間下仍維持原本TCP-友善的特性。
接著我們討論TCP Vegas與TCP Reno共同存在的不公平問題,很多的論文件都指出,在同質環境下TCP Vegas在效能及穩定性上都比TCP Reno好很多,但在異質環境下就明顯較差,導致許多使用者遲遲不使用TCP Vegas,因此本篇論文提出了一種稱為Robust TCP Vegas的演算法,用來改進TCP Vegas 在異質環境下與TCP Reno一起執行的效能,這個演算法主要是希望TCP Vegas可以根據當時網路上的情況來動態調整演算法中的α 及 β值,以達到提升TCP Vegas在異質環境下的整體效能,並達成TCP-友善的目的。
The congestion control of TCP is appropriate for best-effort traffics while ill-suited for the real-time multimedia traffics. Burst transmission, and abrupt and frequent wide rate fluctuations are inherent characteristics of TCP congestion control, and these unfavorable properties leads to some unexpected results such as high delay jitters and sudden quality degradation.
In this thesis, we first describe two TCP-friendly congestion control algorithms, TFRC and TEAR, which use the history discounting with the Average Loss Interval method to smooth the sending rate in order to avoid its large fluctuation for a TCP-friendly flow. However, this averaging method has a problem that it is hard to correctly setup the weights. Thus we propose a new congestion control, Slack Term, to enhance them with a smoother transmission rate while maintaining the friendliness in a long-term time.
We then investigate the unfairness problem when TCP Vegas and TCP Reno coexist. Many studies have demonstrated that TCP Vegas exhibits superior throughput and stability than TCP Reno in a homogeneous case in which a single version exists but performs worse in a heterogeneous case where two versions coexist. An approach, robust TCP Vegas, which dynamically adjusts α and β to large values, is offered with more aggression when competing with TCP Reno and maintains stability when competing with robust TCP Vegas. Also robust TCP Vegas still owns a TCP-friendly behavior.
Table of Contents
Abstract in Chinese…………………………………………………………………...iv
Abstract in English……………………………………………….………………....vi
Acknowledgement……..……………………………………….…………………viii
Table of Contents…………………………………………………..………………..ix
List of Figures………………………………………………………………………xi
List of Tables…………………………………………………………………………xii
Chapter 1 Introduction 1
1.1 Motivations…………………………………………………………………...1
1.2 Organization……………………………………………………………….…3
Chapter 2 TCP Congestion Control Mechanism 5
2.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………..5
2.2 TCP Congestion Control Mechanism……………………………………..5
Chapter 3 A TCP-Friendly Congestion Control to Guarantee Smoothness by Slack Term 8
3.1 Introduction………………………………………………..…………………8
3.2 TFRC and TEAR………………………………………………..…………..10
3.2.1 TFRC……………………………………...…………………………10
3.2.2 TEAR…………………………………...……………………………12
3.3 Proposed Algorithms………………………………………………………..15
3.3.1 Protocol Description…………………………………………………18
3.4 Simulation Results………………………….……………………………….23
3.4.1 Network Model……………………...………………………………23
3.4.2 Dynamics of TFRC-ST and TEAR-ST………………………...……24
3.4.3 Compare TFRC and TFRC-ST…………….…………………...……27
3.4.4 Compare TEAR and TEAR-ST………….……………...……...……30
3.5 Setting of V……………………………………………….…………………33
3.6 Discussion of Transient Behaviors……………………….…………………33
3.6.1 Steady State……………………...…………...……………………34
3.6.2 Responses to step increase of bandwidth…….…………...……35
3.6.3 Responses to step increase of congestion……….……...……36
3.7 Summary………………………………………………....…………………38
Chapter 4 Performance Analysis and Improvement of TCP Vegas in a Heterogeneous Environment 39
4.1 Introduction…………………………………………………………………39
4.2 TCP Reno and TCP Vegas…………………………………………………..41
4.2.1 TCP Reno……………………….....…………...……………………41
4.2.2 TCP Vegas…………………….....…………...…...…………………42
4.3 Bias between Reno and Vegas………………………………….……...……43
4.4 Fairness analysis…………………………...………………………………..48
4.4.1 Analysis Fairness between Reno and Vegas…………………………48
4.4.2 Numerical Result…………………….....…….…...…………………50
4.5 Robust TCP Vegas………………………………………….......…...………52
4.5.1 The Algorithm for Robust TCP Vegas………………….……………53
4.5.2 Simulation Results…………………….....…….….…………………56
4.5.3 Number of Connections…………….……….....……………………59
4.6 Summary……………………………………………………………………61
Chapter 5 Conclusions 62
Bibliography………………………………………………………………………...64
[1]M. Allman S. Floyd and C. Partridge. Increasing TCP's Initial Window, RFC 2414. Sep 1998.
[2]W. Stevens, "TCP Slow Start, Congestion Avoidance, Fast Retransmit, and Fast Recovery Algorithms,' RFC 2001, January 1997.
[3]H. Wang C. Williamson. A New Scheme for TCP Congestion Control: Smooth-Start and Dynamic Recovery, IEEE Proceedings. Sixth International Symposium, pp. 69-76, 1998.
[4]L. S. Brakmo and L. L. Peterson, “TCP Vegas: End to End Congestion Avoidance on a Global Internet,” IEEE JSAC, vol. 13, pp. 1465-1480, 1995.
[5]M. Allman C. Hayes and S. Ostermann. An Evaluation of TCP with Larger Initial Windows, ACM Computer Communication Review, 28(3): 41-52, Jul 1998.
[6]H. Wang H. Xin D. S. Reeves K. G. Shin. A Simple Refinement of Slow-Start of TCP Congestion Control, IEEE ISCC, pp. 98-105, 2000.
[7]S. Floyd and T. Henderson. The NewReno Modification to TCP’s Fast Recovery Algorithm. RFC 2582, April 1999.
[8]J. S. Ahn P. B. Danzing Z. Liu and L. Yan. Evaluation of TCP Vegas: emulation and experiment. IEEE Transactions on Communications, 25(4): 185-95, Oct 1995.
[9]S. Floyd, M. Handley, J. Padhye, and J. Widmer, “Equation-based congestion control for unicast applications.” Technical Report, ACIRI, Feb 2000.
[10]J. Mahdavi and S. Floyd, “TCP-friendly Unicast Rate-based Flow Control,” Note sent to end2end-interest mailing list, Jan. 1997.
[11]I. Rhee, V. Ozdemir and Y. Yi, “TEAR: TCP emulation at receivers-flow control for multimedia streaming,” April 28, 2000.
[12]B. Braden, D. Clark, J. Crowcroft, B. Davie, S. Deering, D. Estrin, S. Floyd, V. Jacobson, G. Minshall, C. Partridge, L. Peterson, K. Ramakrishnan, S. Shenker, J. Wroclawski, and L. Zhang, “Recommendations on Queue Management and Congestion Avoidance in the Internet,” RFC2309, Informational, Apr. 1998.
[13]J. Padhye, V. Firoiu, D. Towsley, and J. Kurose, “Modeling TCP Throughput: A Simple Model and its Empirical Validation,” SIGCOMM Symposium on Communications Architectures and Protocols, Aug. 1998.
[14]K. Fall and S. Floyd, ns–Network Simulator, http://www-mesh.cs.berkeley.edu/ns.
[15]Jacobson, V., "Congestion Avoidance and Control," Computer Communication Review, vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 314-329, Aug. 1988.
[16]Vikram Visweswaraiah and John Heidemann, "Improving Restart of Idle TCP Connections,” Technical Report 97-661, University of Southern California, November 1997.
[17]M. Allman, V. Paxson and W. Stevens, “TCP Congestion Control,” RFC 2581, April 1999.
[18]M. Handley, J. Padhye, and S. Floyd, “TCP Congestion Window Validation,” RFC 2861, June 2000.
[19]Fall, K., and Floyd, S., Simulation-based Comparisons of Tahoe, Reno, and TCP, Computer Communication Review, V. 26 N. 3, July 1996, pp. 5-21, http://www.aciri.org/floyd/papers.html.
[20]S. Floyd, M. Allmann, C. Partridge, Internet-Draft , “Increasing TCP’s initial Window,” draft draft-floydincr-init-win-01.txt, July1997.
[21]G. Hasegawa, M. Murata, and H. Miyahara, "Fairness and Stability of Congestion Control Mechanisms of TCP," IEEE INCOCOM'99, vol. 3, pp. 1329 -1336.
[22]S. Floyd and V. Jacobson, "Connection with multiple Congested Gateways in Packet-Switched Networks, Part 1: One-way Traffic," ACM Computer Communication Review, vol. 21, no. 5, pp. 30-47, August 1991.
[23]Y.-C. Lai and C.-L. Yao. The Performance Comparison between TCP Reno and TCP Vegas. IEEE 2000.
[24]Y.-C. Lai. Improving the Performance of TCP Vegas in a Heterogeneous Environment. ICPAD 2001.
[25]Go Hasegawa, Kenji Kurata and Masayuki Murata, “ Analysis and Improvement of Fairness between TCP Reno and Vegas for Deployment of TCP Vegas to the Internet,” In Proceedings of IEEE ICNP2000, Nov 2000.
[26]J. R. Chen and Y. C. Chen. Vegas Plus: Improving the Service Fairness. IEEE COMMUNICATION LETTERS, 4(5): 176-178, May 2000.
[27]D. Bansal and H. Balakrishnan, “TCP-Friendly Congestion Control for Real-time Streaming Applications,” May 2000, MIT Technical Report MIT-LCS-TR-806.
[28]S. Floyd and K. Fall, “Promoting the Use of End-to-end Congestion Control in the Internet,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, Aug. 1999.
[29]S. Floyd, M. Handley, and J. Padhye, “A Comparison of Equation-based and AIMD Congestion Control,” May 2000. URL http://www.aciri.org/tfrc/.
[30]J. Padhye, “Model-based Approach to TCP-friendly Congestion Control,” Ph.D. thesis, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, Mar. 2000.
[31]J. Padhye, J. Kurose, D. Towsley, and R. Koodli, “A Model Based TCP-Friendly Rate Control Protocol,” In Proceedings of NOSSDAV’99, 1999.
[32]R. Rejaie, M. Handley, and D. Estrin, “An End-to-end Rate-based Congestion Control Mechanism for Realtime Streams in the Internet,” In Proceedings of NOSSDAV’99, 1999.
[33]Reliable Multicast Research Group. URL http://www.east.isi.edu/RMRG/.
[34]D. Tan and A. Zakhor, “Real-time Internet Video Using Error Resilient Scalable Compression and TCP-friendly Transport Protocol,” IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, May 1999.
[35]J. Widmer, “Equation-based Congestion Control,” Feb. 2000, Diploma Thesis, URL http://www.aciri.org/tfrc/.
[36]S. McCanne, V. Jacobson, and M. Vetterli, “Receiver-driven layered multicast,” In Proceedings of SIGCOMM, Stanford, CA, 1996.
[37]M. Handley, S. Floyd, and B. Whetten, “Strawman Specification for TCP-Friendly (Reliable) Multicast Congestion Control (TFMCC),” IRTF Reliable Multicast Research Group Meeting in Pisa, Italy, June 1999.
[38]S. Jacobs and A. Eleftheriadis, “Real-time dynamic rate shaping and control for internet video applications,” In Proceedings of the Workshop on Multimedia Signal Processing, pages 23-25, June 1997.
[39]R. Rejaie, M. Handley, and D. Estrim, “RAP: An end-to-end Rate-based Congestion Control Mechanism for Realtime Streams in the Internet,” In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, 1999.
[40]I. Rhee, N. Balaguru, and G. Rouskas, “MTCP: Scalable TCP-like congestion control for reliable multicast,” In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, New York, March 1999.
[41]L. Vicisano, L. Rizzo, and J. Crowcroft, “TCP-like congestion control for layered multicast data transfer,” In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, August 1997.
[42]Kang-Won Lee, Sungwon Ha, Jia-Ru Li, and Vadavur Bhargavan, “MHPF: A multicast architecture for multimedia communications in the Internet,” IRTF Reliable Multicast Research Group Meeting in Herndon, Virginia, November 1999.
連結至畢業學校之論文網頁點我開啟連結
註: 此連結為研究生畢業學校所提供,不一定有電子全文可供下載,若連結有誤,請點選上方之〝勘誤回報〞功能,我們會盡快修正,謝謝!
QRCODE
 
 
 
 
 
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top