180 likes | 366 Views
Understanding TCP Cubic Performance in the Cloud: a Mean-field Approach. Sonia Belhareth *, Lucile Sassatelli ◊ , Denis Collange *, Dino Lopez-Pacheco ◊ , Guillaume Urvoy -Keller ◊ *Orange Labs , Sophia Antipolis, France
E N D
Understanding TCP Cubic Performance in the Cloud: a Mean-field Approach Sonia Belhareth*, Lucile Sassatelli◊, Denis Collange*, Dino Lopez-Pacheco ◊, Guillaume Urvoy-Keller ◊ *Orange Labs, Sophia Antipolis, France ◊ Laboratoire I3S, Université Nice Sophia Antipolis – CNRS, France IEEE Cloudnet 2013
Motivation • Preliminary: TCP is (obviously) the dominant transport protocol in cloud and data center scenarios • We focus on the following scenario: N long-lived TCP connections sharing a bottleneck link • Two flavors of TCP: • TCP Cubic (default CC of Linux) • TCP NewReno as a legacy reference
Contributions • Mean field approach -> fluid model of interactions of TCP connections • Validation against ns-2 simulations • Extensive comparison between Cubic and New Reno in cloud scenarios
TCP Cubic • For large BDP (bandwidth delay product) network – long fat pipe where: • t is the time since the last loss • C is a constant • wmax is the largest congestion window prior to last loss
TCP Cubic • Advantages of Cubic : • Window growth independent from RTT but only time t since last loss • Fast increase until last max congestion window followed by smooth probing for additional bandwidth • Linux kernel since 2.6.19
TCP Cubic • Cubic can also operate in low BDP networks: where R(t) is the estimated RTT at time t • In practice: w(t)=max(wc(t),wtcp(t)) and the state of Cubic connection is < w(t),wmax> • Key remark: for a given scenario (latency, capacity and buffer size), Cubic is either in Cubic or TCP mode • [See paper for details]
Target scenarios : FTTH, intra-DC and inter-DC • Scenario A: FTTH client DC • Scenario B: intra DC • Scenario C: inter DC
Network model Buffer size: NB • The state of a connection is • The state of the queue is • The current RTT is • The current loss probability is Capacity : NL pkts/s N TCP Cubic connections
Performance analysis • State of the system: • is a mean-field interaction system with N objects • The occupancy measure is the fraction of connections in each state at time t: • Theorem 3.1 of [K70] ensures that converges uniformly almost surely to the solution of coupled ODE: [K70] T. G. Kurtz, Solutions of Ordinary Differential Equations as Limits of Pure Jump Markov Processes, Journal of Applied Probability, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 49–58, 1970. [BL08] M. Benaïm and J.-Y. Le Boudec, A class of mean field interaction models for computer and communication systems, Performance Evaluation, vol. 65, no. 11-12, pp. 823–838, 2008.
Performance analysis The cx detects a loss The cx gets the ACK Input rate
Performance analysis • Former model derived from the model for NewReno proposed in F. Baccelli, D. R. McDonald, and J. Reynier, “A mean-field model for multiple TCP connections through a buffer implementing red,” Perform. Eval., vol. 49, no. 1-4, Sep. 2002. • Our extensions : • Extension to Cubic whose window growth rate depends on time • Need to account for loss time (loss process is assumed Poisson as in Baccelli et al.)
Numerical validation • Comparison against ns-2 simulations • Note that we do not model the slow start • Very good accuracy for FTTH DC and intra DC scenarios
Numerical validation • Less accuracy for inter-DC • Only scenario in pure Cubic mode • The synchronization also studied by Hassayoun et al. through simulations. • Persists even with RED, traffic on reverse path or multiplexing level.
Performance Analysis • Question 1: is TCP Cubic as fair as NewReno? • At least for TCP mode of Cubic in first two scenarios • Question 2 : how efficient is TCP Cubic with small buffer sizes? • [Lei07] observed through experimentation detrimental effects of small buffers for Cubic • Hence the question : is it due to (early) implementation of Cubic or is it intrinsic to Cubic itself?
Fairness • CoV (std/mean) of congestion window • CoV close to 0 : very good fairness • The larger the CoV, the smaller the fairness • (CoV related to Jain Fairness index) • Take-away: Cubic is more fair than TCP (in TCP mode)
Impact of buffer size • Better utilization by Cubic • Both Cubic and New Reno are greedy not good for newly arriving cx • Cubic is more greedy than New Reno • TCP New Reno is clearly less efficient than Cubic for buffer sizes smaller than 60% of the BDP • Our model suggests that Cubic is able to survive with buffer sizes as small as 20% of the BDP
Conclusions and future work • Model for TCP mode of Cubic (and NewReno) • Valid for a large set of cloud related scenarios • (for 1 Gb/s link, need 16 ms or RTT for triggering Cubic mode) • Allow to investigate some fundamental features related to fairness and impact of buffer sizes • Future work: • Introduction of heterogeneity - mix of short and long-lived connections, different RTT, other versions (Compound) • Need to investigate synchronization effects of Cubic mode