Analytic models and comparative study of the latency and steady-state throughput of TCP Tahoe, Reno and SACK
Analytic models and comparative study of the latency and steady-state throughput of TCP Tahoe, Reno and SACK
复制标题
DOI：
10.1109/glocom.2001.965883
复制
发表时间：
2001-11
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
B. Sikdar;S. Kalyanaraman;K. Vastola
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
B. Sikdar;S. Kalyanaraman;K. Vastola
在本文中，我们提出了分析模型来估计TCP Tahoe，里诺和SACK的延迟和稳态吞吐量，并验证我们的模型使用模拟和TCP痕迹收集从互联网上。我们还进行了一项研究，比较这些版本的TCP在不同的损失情况下的性能。除了作为有限Tahoe和SACK流的延迟的第一个模型之外，我们的TCP里诺延迟模型给出了比现有模型更准确的传输时间估计。我们的模型表明，下的droptail队列，占主导地位的大多数路由器在互联网上引入的损失，目前实现的SACK未能提供足够的保护，防止超时和损失的大约一半以上的数据包在一轮将导致超时。我们还表明，与独立的损失，SACK表现优于太浩湖和里诺和损失成为相关的，太浩湖可以优于里诺和SACK。
In this paper we present analytic models to estimate the latency and steady-state throughput of TCP Tahoe, Reno and SACK and validate our models using both simulations and TCP traces collected from the Internet. We also conduct a study comparing the performance of these versions of TCP under different loss scenarios. In addition to being the first models for the latency of finite Tahoe and SACK flows, our model for the latency of TCP Reno gives a more accurate estimation of the transfer times than existing models. Our models show that under the losses introduced by the droptail queues which dominate most routers in the Internet, current implementations of SACK fail to provide adequate protection against timeouts and a loss of roughly more than half the packets in a round will lead to timeouts. We also show that with independent losses, SACK performs better than Tahoe and Reno and as losses become correlated, Tahoe can outperform both Reno and SACK.