1.07k likes | 1.08k Views
millions of connected computing devices: hosts = end systems examples of hosts? running network apps examples of applications?. router. workstation. server. mobile. local ISP. regional ISP. company network. What’s the Internet: “nuts and bolts” view. communication links
E N D
millions of connected computing devices: hosts = end systems examples of hosts? running network apps examples of applications? router workstation server mobile local ISP regional ISP company network What’s the Internet: “nuts and bolts” view Transport Layer
communication links fiber, copper, radio, satellite transmission rate = bandwidth typical bandwidth for modem? wireless? routers: forward packets (chunks of data) what’s in a packet? router workstation server mobile local ISP regional ISP company network What’s the Internet: “nuts and bolts” view Transport Layer
protocolscontrol sending, receiving of msgs e.g., TCP, IP, HTTP, FTP, PPP Internet: “network of networks” loosely hierarchical public Internet versus private intranet Internet standards RFC: Request for comments IETF: Internet Engineering Task Force What’s the Internet: “nuts and bolts” view router workstation server mobile local ISP regional ISP company network Transport Layer
communication infrastructure enables distributed applications: Web, email, other examples? communication services provided to apps: connection-oriented reliable example apps? Connectionless unreliable example apps? What’s the Internet: a service view Transport Layer
human protocols: “what’s the time?” “I have a question” introductions network protocols: machines rather than humans all communication activity in Internet governed by protocols What’s a protocol? protocols define format, order of msgs sent and received among network entities, and actions taken on msg transmission, receipt Transport Layer
a human protocol and a computer network protocol: TCP connection response Get http://www.awl.com/kurose-ross Got the time? 2:00 <file> time What’s a protocol? Hi TCP connection req Hi Q: Why are protocols so important? Transport Layer
network edge: applications and hosts network core: routers network of networks access networks, physical media: communication links A closer look at network structure: Transport Layer
Networks are complex! many “pieces”: hosts routers links of various media applications protocols hardware, software Question: Is there any hope of organizing structure of network? Or at least our discussion of networks? Protocol “Layers” Transport Layer
ticket (complain) baggage (claim) gates (unload) runway landing airplane routing ticket (purchase) baggage (check) gates (load) runway takeoff airplane routing airplane routing Organization of air travel • a series of steps Transport Layer
ticket ticket (purchase) baggage (check) gates (load) runway (takeoff) airplane routing ticket (complain) baggage (claim gates (unload) runway (land) airplane routing baggage gate airplane routing airplane routing takeoff/landing airplane routing departure airport intermediate air-traffic control centers arrival airport Layering of airline functionality Layers: each layer implements a service • via its own internal-layer actions • relying on services provided by layer below Transport Layer
Why layering? Dealing with complex systems: • explicit structure allows identification, relationship of complex system’s pieces • layered reference model for discussion • modularization eases maintenance, updating of system • change of implementation of layer’s service transparent to rest of system • e.g., change in gate procedure doesn’t affect rest of system • layering considered harmful? Transport Layer
application: supporting network applications FTP, SMTP, STTP transport: host-host data transfer TCP, UDP network: routing of datagrams from source to destination IP, routing protocols link: data transfer between neighboring network elements PPP, Ethernet physical: bits “on the wire” application transport network link physical Internet protocol stack Transport Layer
network link physical link physical M M Ht Ht M M Hn Hn Hn Hn Ht Ht Ht Ht M M M M Hl Hl Hl Hl Hl Hl Hn Hn Hn Hn Hn Hn Ht Ht Ht Ht Ht Ht M M M M M M source Encapsulation message application transport network link physical segment datagram frame switch destination application transport network link physical router Transport Layer
TCP service: connection-oriented: setup required between client and server processes reliable transport between sending and receiving process flow control: sender won’t overwhelm receiver congestion control: throttle sender when network overloaded does not provide: timing, minimum bandwidth guarantees UDP service: unreliable data transfer between sending and receiving process does not provide: connection setup, reliability, flow control, congestion control, timing, or bandwidth guarantee Q: why bother? Why is there a UDP? Internet transport protocols services Transport Layer
network layer: logical communication between hosts transport layer: logical communication between processes relies on, enhances, network layer services Household analogy: 12 kids sending letters to 12 kids processes = kids app messages = letters in envelopes hosts = houses transport protocol = Ann and Bill network-layer protocol = postal service Transport vs. network layer Transport Layer
We’ll: incrementally develop sender, receiver sides of reliable data transfer protocol (rdt) consider only unidirectional data transfer but control info will flow on both directions! use finite state machines (FSM) to specify sender, receiver event state 1 state 2 actions Reliable data transfer: getting started event causing state transition actions taken on state transition state: when in this “state” next state uniquely determined by next event Transport Layer
underlying channel perfectly reliable no bit errors no loss of packets separate FSMs for sender, receiver: sender sends data into underlying channel receiver read data from underlying channel Rdt1.0: reliable transfer over a reliable channel rdt_send(data) rdt_rcv(packet) Wait for call from below Wait for call from above extract (packet,data) deliver_data(data) packet = make_pkt(data) udt_send(packet) sender receiver Transport Layer
underlying channel may flip bits in packet checksum to detect bit errors the question: how to recover from errors: acknowledgements (ACKs): receiver explicitly tells sender that pkt received OK negative acknowledgements (NAKs): receiver explicitly tells sender that pkt had errors sender retransmits pkt on receipt of NAK new mechanisms in rdt2.0 (beyond rdt1.0): error detection receiver feedback: control msgs (ACK,NAK) rcvr->sender Rdt2.0: channel with bit errors Transport Layer
Wait for ACK or NAK rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && corrupt(rcvpkt) udt_send(NAK) Wait for call from below rdt2.0: FSM specification rdt_send(data) receiver snkpkt = make_pkt(data, checksum) udt_send(sndpkt) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && isNAK(rcvpkt) Wait for call from above udt_send(sndpkt) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && isACK(rcvpkt) L sender rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt) extract(rcvpkt,data) deliver_data(data) udt_send(ACK) Transport Layer
Wait for ACK or NAK rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && corrupt(rcvpkt) udt_send(NAK) rdt2.0: operation with no errors rdt_send(data) snkpkt = make_pkt(data, checksum) udt_send(sndpkt) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && isNAK(rcvpkt) Wait for call from above udt_send(sndpkt) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && isACK(rcvpkt) Wait for call from below L rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt) extract(rcvpkt,data) deliver_data(data) udt_send(ACK) Transport Layer
Wait for ACK or NAK rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && corrupt(rcvpkt) udt_send(NAK) rdt2.0: error scenario rdt_send(data) snkpkt = make_pkt(data, checksum) udt_send(sndpkt) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && isNAK(rcvpkt) Wait for call from above udt_send(sndpkt) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && isACK(rcvpkt) Wait for call from below L rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt) extract(rcvpkt,data) deliver_data(data) udt_send(ACK) Transport Layer
rdt2.0 has a fatal flaw! • Stop and Wait • Sender sends one packet, then waits for receiver response • What happens if ACK/NAK corrupted? • sender doesn’t know what happened at receiver! • can’t just retransmit: possible duplicate • Handling duplicates: • sender adds sequence number to each pkt • sender retransmits current pkt if ACK/NAK garbled • receiver discards (doesn’t deliver up) duplicate pkt Transport Layer
Wait for ACK or NAK 0 Wait for call 1 from above Wait for ACK or NAK 1 rdt2.1: sender, handles garbled ACK/NAKs rdt_send(data) sndpkt = make_pkt(0, data, checksum) udt_send(sndpkt) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && ( corrupt(rcvpkt) || isNAK(rcvpkt) ) Wait for call 0 from above udt_send(sndpkt) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt) && isACK(rcvpkt) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt) && isACK(rcvpkt) L L rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && ( corrupt(rcvpkt) || isNAK(rcvpkt) ) rdt_send(data) sndpkt = make_pkt(1, data, checksum) udt_send(sndpkt) udt_send(sndpkt) Transport Layer
Wait for 0 from below Wait for 1 from below rdt2.1: receiver, handles garbled ACK/NAKs rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt) && has_seq0(rcvpkt) extract(rcvpkt,data) deliver_data(data) sndpkt = make_pkt(ACK, chksum) udt_send(sndpkt) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && (corrupt(rcvpkt) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && (corrupt(rcvpkt) sndpkt = make_pkt(NAK, chksum) udt_send(sndpkt) sndpkt = make_pkt(NAK, chksum) udt_send(sndpkt) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && not corrupt(rcvpkt) && has_seq1(rcvpkt) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && not corrupt(rcvpkt) && has_seq0(rcvpkt) sndpkt = make_pkt(ACK, chksum) udt_send(sndpkt) sndpkt = make_pkt(ACK, chksum) udt_send(sndpkt) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt) && has_seq1(rcvpkt) extract(rcvpkt,data) deliver_data(data) sndpkt = make_pkt(ACK, chksum) udt_send(sndpkt) Transport Layer
Sender: seq # added to pkt two seq. #’s (0,1) will suffice. Why? must check if received ACK/NAK corrupted twice as many states state must “remember” whether “current” pkt has 0 or 1 seq. # Receiver: must check if received packet is duplicate state indicates whether 0 or 1 is expected pkt seq # note: receiver can not know if its last ACK/NAK received OK at sender rdt2.1: discussion Transport Layer
same functionality as rdt2.1, using ACKs only instead of NAK, receiver sends ACK for last pkt received OK receiver must explicitly include seq # of pkt being ACKed duplicate ACK at sender results in same action as NAK: retransmit current pkt rdt2.2: a NAK-free protocol Transport Layer
Wait for ACK 0 Wait for call 0 from above Wait for 0 from below rdt2.2: sender, receiver fragments rdt_send(data) sndpkt = make_pkt(0, data, checksum) udt_send(sndpkt) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && ( corrupt(rcvpkt) || isACK(rcvpkt,1) ) udt_send(sndpkt) sender FSM fragment rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt) && isACK(rcvpkt,0) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && (corrupt(rcvpkt) || has_seq1(rcvpkt)) L receiver FSM fragment udt_send(sndpkt) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt) && has_seq1(rcvpkt) extract(rcvpkt,data) deliver_data(data) sndpkt = make_pkt(ACK1, chksum) udt_send(sndpkt) Transport Layer
New assumption: underlying channel can also lose packets (data or ACKs) checksum, seq. #, ACKs, retransmissions will be of help, but not enough Approach: sender waits “reasonable” amount of time for ACK retransmits if no ACK received in this time if pkt (or ACK) just delayed (not lost): retransmission will be duplicate, but use of seq. #’s already handles this receiver must specify seq # of pkt being ACKed requires countdown timer rdt3.0: channels with errors and loss Transport Layer
Wait for ACK0 Wait for ACK1 Wait for call 1 from above Wait for call 0from above rdt3.0 sender rdt_send(data) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && ( corrupt(rcvpkt) || isACK(rcvpkt,1) ) sndpkt = make_pkt(0, data, checksum) udt_send(sndpkt) start_timer L rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) L timeout udt_send(sndpkt) start_timer rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt) && isACK(rcvpkt,1) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && notcorrupt(rcvpkt) && isACK(rcvpkt,0) stop_timer stop_timer timeout udt_send(sndpkt) start_timer rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) L rdt_send(data) rdt_rcv(rcvpkt) && ( corrupt(rcvpkt) || isACK(rcvpkt,0) ) sndpkt = make_pkt(1, data, checksum) udt_send(sndpkt) start_timer L Transport Layer
rdt3.0 in action Transport Layer
rdt3.0 in action Transport Layer
rdt3.0 works, but performance stinks Why? Performance of rdt3.0 Transport Layer
rdt3.0: stop-and-wait operation sender receiver first packet bit transmitted, t = 0 last packet bit transmitted, t = L / R first packet bit arrives RTT last packet bit arrives, send ACK ACK arrives, send next packet, t = RTT + L / R Transport Layer
Pipelining: sender allows multiple, “in-flight”, yet-to-be-acknowledged pkts range of sequence numbers must be increased buffering at sender and/or receiver Two generic forms of pipelined protocols: go-Back-N, selective repeat Pipelined protocols Transport Layer
Pipelining: increased utilization sender receiver first packet bit transmitted, t = 0 last bit transmitted, t = L / R first packet bit arrives RTT last packet bit arrives, send ACK last bit of 2nd packet arrives, send ACK last bit of 3rd packet arrives, send ACK ACK arrives, send next packet, t = RTT + L / R Transport Layer
Sender: k-bit seq # in pkt header “window” of up to N, consecutive unack’ed pkts allowed Go-Back-N • ACK(n): ACKs all pkts up to, including seq # n - “cumulative ACK” • may deceive duplicate ACKs (see receiver) • timer for each in-flight pkt • timeout(n): retransmit pkt n and all higher seq # pkts in window Transport Layer
GBN: receiver ACK-only: always send ACK for correctly-received pkt with highest in-order seq # • may generate duplicate ACKs • need only remember expectedseqnum • out-of-order pkt: • discard (don’t buffer) -> isn't this bad? • Re-ACK pkt with highest in-order seq # Transport Layer
GBN inaction Transport Layer
receiver individually acknowledges all correctly received pkts buffers pkts, as needed, for eventual in-order delivery to upper layer sender only resends pkts for which ACK not received sender timer for each unACKed pkt sender window N consecutive seq #’s again limits seq #s of sent, unACKed pkts Selective Repeat Transport Layer
Selective repeat: sender, receiver windows Transport Layer
data from above : if next available seq # in window, send pkt timeout(n): resend pkt n, restart timer ACK(n) in [sendbase,sendbase+N]: mark pkt n as received if n smallest unACKed pkt, advance window base to next unACKed seq # receiver sender Selective repeat pkt n in [rcvbase, rcvbase+N-1] • send ACK(n) • out-of-order: buffer • in-order: deliver (also deliver buffered, in-order pkts), advance window to next not-yet-received pkt pkt n in [rcvbase-N,rcvbase-1] • ACK(n) otherwise: • ignore Transport Layer
Selective repeat in action Transport Layer
Example: seq #’s: 0, 1, 2, 3 window size=3 receiver sees no difference in two scenarios! incorrectly passes duplicate data as new in (a) Q: what relationship between seq # size and window size? Selective repeat: dilemma Transport Layer
full duplex data: bi-directional data flow in same connection MSS: maximum segment size connection-oriented: handshaking (exchange of control msgs) init’s sender, receiver state before data exchange flow controlled: sender will not overwhelm receiver point-to-point: one sender, one receiver reliable, in-order byte steam: no “message boundaries” pipelined: TCP congestion and flow control set window size send & receive buffers TCP: OverviewRFCs: 793, 1122, 1323, 2018, 2581 Transport Layer
32 bits source port # dest port # sequence number acknowledgement number head len not used Receive window U A P R S F checksum Urg data pnter Options (variable length) application data (variable length) TCP segment structure URG: urgent data (generally not used) counting by bytes of data (not segments!) ACK: ACK # valid PSH: push data now (generally not used) # bytes rcvr willing to accept RST, SYN, FIN: connection estab (setup, teardown commands) Internet checksum (as in UDP) Transport Layer
Seq. #’s: byte stream “number” of first byte in segment’s data ACKs: seq # of next byte expected from other side cumulative ACK piggybacking Q: how receiver handles out-of-order segments A: TCP spec doesn’t say, - up to implementor time TCP seq. #’s and ACKs Host B Host A User types ‘C’ Seq=42, ACK=79, data = ‘C’ host ACKs receipt of ‘C’, echoes back ‘C’ Seq=79, ACK=43, data = ‘C’ host ACKs receipt of echoed ‘C’ Seq=43, ACK=80 simple telnet scenario Transport Layer
Q: how to set TCP timeout value? longer than RTT but RTT varies too short: premature timeout unnecessary retransmissions too long: slow reaction to segment loss Q: how to estimate RTT? SampleRTT: measured time from segment transmission until ACK receipt ignore retransmissions SampleRTT will vary, want estimated RTT “smoother” average several recent measurements, not just current SampleRTT TCP Round Trip Time and Timeout Transport Layer
Example RTT estimation: Transport Layer
TCP creates rdt service on top of IP’s unreliable service Pipelined segments Cumulative acks TCP uses single retransmission timer Retransmissions are triggered by: timeout events duplicate acks Initially consider simplified TCP sender: ignore duplicate acks ignore flow control, congestion control TCP reliable data transfer Transport Layer
data rcvd from app: Create segment with seq # seq # is byte-stream number of first data byte in segment start timer if not already running (think of timer as for oldest unacked segment) expiration interval: TimeOutInterval timeout: retransmit segment that caused timeout restart timer Ack rcvd: If acknowledges previously unacked segments update what is known to be acked start timer if there are outstanding segments TCP sender events: Transport Layer