280 likes | 1.01k Views
“ Analysis of the Increase and Decrease Algorithms for Congestion Avoidance in Computer Networks ”. Lecture Note 7. “ Analysis of the Increase and Decrease Algorithms for Congestion Avoidance in Computer Networks ”. by Dah-Ming Chiu and Raj Jain, DEC Computer Networks and ISDN Systems
E N D
“Analysis of the Increase and Decrease Algorithms for Congestion Avoidance in Computer Networks” Lecture Note 7
“Analysis of the Increase and Decrease Algorithms for Congestion Avoidance in Computer Networks” by Dah-Ming Chiu and Raj Jain, DEC Computer Networks and ISDN Systems 17 (1989), pp. 1-14
Motivation (1) • Internet is heterogeneous • Different bandwidth of links • Different load from users • Congestion control • Help improve performance after congestion has occurred • Congestion avoidance • Keep the network operating off the congestion
Motivation (2) • Fig. 1. Network performance as a function of the load.
Power of a Network • The power of the network describes this relationship of throughput and delay: • Power = Goodput/Delay • This is based on M/M/1 queues ( 1 server and a Markov distribution of packet arrival and service). • This assumes infinite queues, but real networks the have finite buffers and occasionally drop packets. • The objective is to maximize this ration, which is a function of the load on the network. • Ideally the resource mechanism operates at the peak of this curve.
Motivation (2) • Power = {Goodput}/{Response Time} • Fig. 1. Network performance as a function of the load.
Relate Works • Centralized algorithm • Information flows to the resource managers and the decision of how to allocate the resource is made at the resource [Sanders86] • Decentralized algorithms • Decisions are made by users while the resources feed information regarding current resource usage [Jaffe81, Gafni82, Mosely84] • Binary feedback signal and linear control • Synchronized model • What are all the possible solutions that converge to efficient and fair states
Linear Control (1) • 4 examples of linear control functions • Multiplicative Increase/Multiplicative Decrease • Additive Increase/Additive Decrease • Additive Increase/Multiplicative Decrease • Additive Increase/ Additive Decrease
Linear Control (2) • Multiplicative Increase/Multiplicative Decrease • Additive Increase/Additive Decrease • Additive Increase/Multiplicative Decrease • Multiplicative Increase/ Additive Decrease
Criteria for Selecting Controls • Efficiency • Closeness of the total load on the resource to the knee point • Fairness • Users have the equal share of bandwidth • Distributedness • Knowledge of the state of the system • Convergence • The speed with which the system approaches the goal state from any starting state
Responsiveness and Smoothness of Binary Feedback System • Equlibrium with oscillates around the optimal state
Example of Additive Increase/ Multiplicative Decrease Function
Convergence to Efficiency • Negative feedback • So • If y=0: • If y=1: • Or
c>0 Convergence to Fairness (1) where c=a/b (6)
Convergence to Fairness (2) • c>0 implies: • Furthermore, combined with (3) we have:
Distributedness • Having no knowledge other than the feedback y(t) • Each user tries to satisfy the negative feedback condition by itself • Implies (10) to be
Important Results • Proposition 1: In order to satisfy the requirements of distributed convergence to efficiency and fairness without truncation, the linear increase policy should always have an additive component, and optionally it may have a multiplicative component with the coefficient no less than one. • Proposition 2: For the linear controls with truncation, the increase and decrease policies can each have both additive and multiplicative components, satisfying the constrains in Equations (16)
Optimizing the Control Schemes • Optimal convergence to Efficiency • Tradeoff of time to convergent to efficiency te, with the oscillation size, se. • Optimal convergence to Fairness
Optimal convergence to Efficiency • Given initial state X(0), the time to reach Xgoal is:
Optimal convergence to Fairness • Equation (7) shows faireness function is monotonically increasing function of c=a/b. • So larger values of a and smaller values b give quicker convergence to fairness. • In strict linear control, aD=0 => fairness remains the same at every decrease step • For increase, smaller bI results in quicker convergence to fairness => bI =1 to get the quickest convergence to fairness • Proposition 3: For both feasibility and optimal convergence to fairness, the increase policy should be additive and the decrease policy should be multiplicative.
Practical Considerations • Non-linear controls • Delay feedback • Utility of increased bits of feedback • Guess the current number of users n • Impact of asynchronous operation
Conclusion • We examined the user increase/decrease policies under the constrain of binary signal feedback • We formulated a set of conditions that any increase/decrease policy should satisfy to ensure convergence to efficiency and fair state in a distributed manner • We show the decrease must be multiplicative to ensure that at every step the fairness either increases or stays the same • We explain the conditions using a vector representation • We show that additive increase with multiplicative decrease is the optimal policy for convergence to fairness