1 / 18

Advanced Fast Retransmit + Wireless

Advanced Fast Retransmit + Wireless. EE122 Discussion Section 12. Fast Retransmit. On receipt of 3 duplicate ACKs CWND ← CWND/2 Retransmit the “inferred” lost packet Go into congestion avoidance mode, linear increase Problem

shadi
Download Presentation

Advanced Fast Retransmit + Wireless

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. Advanced Fast Retransmit+ Wireless EE122 Discussion Section 12

  2. Fast Retransmit • On receipt of 3 duplicate ACKs • CWND ← CWND/2 • Retransmit the “inferred” lost packet • Go into congestion avoidance mode, linear increase • Problem • Intervals of no activity! (CWND can be quite large!) and then a burst! • The duplicate ACKs do give information about “some” packets. • These packets are no longer in flight and are received by the receiver.

  3. Improving upon Fast Retransmit(Advanced) Fast Retransmit • Duplicate ACKs result from “some” packets getting delivered • Thus they are no longer in flight • Artificially blowing up CWND to account for these packets • CWND -> CWND/2 + 3; ssthresh = CWND/2 • Because 3 duplicate ACKs => 3 packets no longer in flight • Increment CWND by 1 on every duplicate ack received thereafter (till a new ACK) • Even though CWND increases exponentially, your sending rate is not increasing. • When new ACK comes, deflate to ssthresh (i.e. previous CWND / 2)

  4. Wireless

  5. Path Loss / Power • Free Space Path Loss • Square of frequency • Square of distance Problem 2 • Arguments against using huge signal strength • Greater Power for transmission • Signal propagates farther causing more interference.

  6. A talks to B C senses the channel C does not hear A’s transmission C talks to B Signals from A and B collide Carrier Sense will be ineffective – need to sense at receiver Hidden Terminals Collision A C B transmit range 6

  7. Exposed Terminals B talks to A C wants to talk to D C senses the channel and finds it busy C remains quiet (when it could have transmitted) Carrier sense would prevent a successful transmission But we do carrier sense anway (why?) A B C D 7

  8. Key Points • No concept of a global collision • Different receivers hear different signals • Different senders reach different receivers • Collisions are at receiver, not sender • Only care if receiver can hear the sender clearly • It does not matter if sender can hear someone else • As long as that signal does not interfere with receiver • Goal of protocol: • Detect if receiver can hear sender • Tell senders who might interfere with receiver to shut up

  9. MA with Collision Avoidance (MACA) Before every data transmission Sender sends a Request to Send (RTS) frame containing the length of the transmission Receiver responds with a Clear to Send (CTS) frame Sender transmits Receiver sends an ACK; now another sender can send data When sender doesn’t get a CTS back, it assumes collision When you hear a CTS, you keep quiet until scheduled transmission is over (hear ACK) RTS CTS data ACK other node in sender’s range sender receiver 9

  10. MACA, con’t If other nodes hear RTS, but not CTS: send Presumably, destination for first sender is out of node’s range Can cause problems when a CTS is lost other node in sender’s range receiver sender RTS CTS data data 10

  11. A sends RTS B sends CTS C also hears CTS C doesn’t transmit Collision avoided! Hidden Terminals RTS CTS CTS A C B Data transmit range 11

  12. Exposed Terminals B sends RTS to A C gets this RTS as well C cannot hear A’s CTS C can also transmit!! RTS A A B B C C D D RTS Transmission can be done Can’t hear CTS CTS A B C D 12

  13. Problem 3Cheating Can C improve it’s performance by “cheating” and ignoring the CTS messages exchanged between A and B? B D A C A B C D

  14. Problem 3Cheating Can D improve it’s performance by “cheating” and ignoring the CTS messages exchanged between A and B? B D A C A B C D

  15. Problem 4: (a) Reversing communication direction in the exposed terminal example: Not solved by RTS / CTS RTS (1) A B C D CTS (2) for A RTS (3) CTS (2) Transmission Not done A B C D

  16. Problem 4: (b) Collision even after a successful RTS/CTS exchange C doesn’t get to know that A and B are communicating RTS (3) A B C D E A B C D CTS (4) for A RTS (1) RTS (1) for E C can’t hear this CTS (4) CTS (2) A B C D E

  17. Problem 4: (c) Fairness? Starvation? A->B C->D: C->D communication may never take place: 1. A keeps on sending. 2. C keeps backing off. RTS (1) A B C D RTS (3) CTS (2) for A CTS (2) Transmission Not done A B C D

  18. Problem 5: Frame Sizing Too small frames Comparable to size of RTS / CTS messages Large overhead! 18

More Related