190 likes | 312 Views
Internet Networking Spring 2003. Tutorial 12 Limited Transmit RFC 3042 Long Thin Networks RFC 2757. Limited Transmit RFC 3042. The problem. cwnd can be smaller than 4 Due to a large number of packet loss, less than 3 dup acks will arrive
E N D
Internet NetworkingSpring 2003 Tutorial 12 Limited TransmitRFC 3042 Long Thin NetworksRFC 2757
The problem • cwnd can be smaller than 4 • Due to a large number of packet loss, less than 3 dup acks will arrive • This causes a timeout rather than a Fast Retransmit.
TCP modification • The sender will send a new segment for each dup-Ack it receives. • The amount of data is limited to cwnd+2 • cwnd does NOT change due to a dup-ack.
Example 3 cwnd=3 4 5 ACK(3) ACK(3) 6 7 ACK(3) ACK(3) Congestion avoidance ---- Fast retransmit Sstresh = 3/2 = 2 Cwnd = sstresh+3=2+3=5 3 X ACK(8)
Example #2 3 cwnd=3 ------- 4 5 ACK(3) ACK(3) ACK(6) 6 7 cwnd=4 ------- 8 9
ECN and Limited Transmit • ECN can inform of congestion without dropping the packet, thus allowing TCP with small cwnd to be aware of congestion while avoiding timeouts. • ECN requires the co-operation of the network, while Limited Transmit does not. • Can be simultaneously used.
Definitions • Long: High delay • Longer RTT. • Thin: Low bandwidth • The delay*bw product can be small, what influence does it have on cwnd ? • Example: wireless network. • Counter examples: • Satellite (Long Fat Networks) • Wireless LAN (Short Fat Networks) • More information can be found at: • http://www.cas.mcmaster.ca/~wmfarmer/SE-4C03-02/projects/student_work/mcmahoj.html • RFC 2757.
BER: Bit Error Rate • Higher error rate than a wired link • Possible solutions: • At the link layer: DLC that ensures FIFO and reliability (as learned in the previous course) • No DLC at the link layer: • PEP: Performance Enhancing Proxies (Indirect-TCP) • Lower MTU
DLC and duplicate retransmission TCP RTO Link layer timeout Redundant transmission
PEP: Performance Enhancing Proxies. • Instead of End-to-End TCP: • User -> Intermediate Node (IN) -> Wire-line Internet. IN internet Application Application TCP TCP TCP IP IP IP IP MAC MAC Link Link Link Link
PEP: Pros • Shield the wire Internet from the wireless connection and vice-versa. • TCP for the wireless link can be enhanced, due to the knowledge we have on that specific network. • Different cwnd and RTO • Since the RTT of the single wireless link is smaller than the whole route RTT, faster local recovery is achieved. • More freedom for the wireless part; Doesn’t have to be TCP compatible.
PEP: Cons • TCP end-to-end Semantic is broken • IN is usually a single point of failure. • Movement of the client can cause IN change; Since we are referring to W-LTN and not W-LAN, This has much less probability. • Overloading of the IN: much problematic in LFN than LTN. The IN holds 2 stacks of TCP connections. • Handles disconnections poorly • Possible BS buffer overloading. Higher buffer increases hand-off latency when changing cells.
Indirect TCP • Split TCP connection into 2 TCPs • BS acts as a proxy and relays all data • FHsends a packet • BS acknowledges this packet and forwards the packet to MH • Packet is lost on wireless link • BS can notices faster due to lower RTT and retransmit packet wireless TCP regular TCP Internet Mobile Host (MH) Fixed Host (FH) Base Station (BS)
PEP: retransmission TCP RTO ACK TCP2 RTO ACK
TCP connection application application application transport transport transport network network network retrans link link link physical physical physical FH BS MH wireless TCP-Aware Link Layer Protocol • Retains local recovery of Split connection approach and link level retransmission schemes • Snoop protocol, by Berkley: not in the course material