1 / 11

TFRC with Self-Limiting Sources

TFRC with Self-Limiting Sources. http://www.phelan-4.com/dccp/tfrc-self-limit.pdf Tom Phelan – Sonus Networks tphelan@sonusnet.com 9-November-2004 http://www.phelan-4.com/dccp/DCCP-TFRC-self-limit-DC.ppt. Motivation. File transfer type applications are greedy

jesseramirez
Download Presentation

TFRC with Self-Limiting Sources

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. TFRC with Self-Limiting Sources http://www.phelan-4.com/dccp/tfrc-self-limit.pdf Tom Phelan – Sonus Networks tphelan@sonusnet.com 9-November-2004 http://www.phelan-4.com/dccp/DCCP-TFRC-self-limit-DC.ppt

  2. Motivation • File transfer type applications are greedy • They will attempt to consume all available bandwidth • Streaming media is not • There’s some maximum throughput that will satisfy the app • TFRC simulations to date have used simulated file transfer type applications • What happens when self-limiting sources using TFRC compete with TCP file transfer sources?

  3. The VoIP Media Source • Simulates G.711 VoIP • One 8-bit sample every 125 µs • Samples periodically assembled into packets • 10 ms gives 80 bytes of voice payload • Add RTP header (12 bytes), UDP header (8 bytes) and IP header (20 bytes) • Makes 100, 120-byte packets per second – 96K bps

  4. Simulated Network • Three major scenarios: • Cable access, inbound (1.5M bps chokepoint) • Cable access, outbound (256K bps chokepoint) • Server farm (45M bps chokepoint)

  5. Simulation 1 • 1.5M bps chokepoint • 1 TCP, 1 TFRC • Reasonable performance

  6. Simulation 3 • 6 TCP, 1 TCP • Fair share is about 214K bps • TFRC driven down to about 20K bps • Hello? Hello?

  7. Simulation 7 • Use pure CBR without TFRC • Flow loses packets, but gets OK throughput • Why don’t TFRC flows look like this?

  8. It’s Packet Rate, not Byte Rate (stupid) • Dado Colussi pointed out – TFRC goal is fairness in packet rate, not byte rate • Measured in pps, TFRC source is getting fair share (even a little more) • Little comfort to the people trying to have a conversation, though  • Paper updated for this in late October

  9. VoIP Mode (or Sally to the rescue) • Special dispensation for apps that send no more than 100 pps • Throughput computation adjusted to be fair in bps to TCP with big packets • More from Sally after this • Lot’s of work to do, but looks promising

  10. VoIP Mode Simulation

  11. DCCP User Guide • Was looking grim before VoIP mode • Needed to reconsider almost entire content • But if VoIP mode stands up, so does current content • Some tweaks needed • Need feedback • Held off asking because so much feedback happening on main spec and CCIDs

More Related