Revisiting inter-flow fairness

Bhatti, Saleem N.; Bateman, Martin; Miras, D.

doi:10.1109/broadnets.2008.4769146

Cited by 7 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Specifically, there may be interprotocol unfairness [4], [5], which occurs when flows from different TCP variants having different congestion control mechanisms (e.g., Vegas [6] and Reno [7]) interact with each other. Moreover, even if the same TCP implementation is used by all the end-user applications, intra-protocol unfairness may still occur due to differences in the round-trip times (RTTs) of various flows [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fairness-Driven Queue Management: A Survey and Taxonomy

Abbas

Halim

Abbas

2016

IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Providing congestion control in the Internet, while ensuring fairness among myriad of heterogeneous flows is a challenging task. The conventional wisdom is to rely on end-user applications cooperatively deploying congestion control mechanisms to achieve high network utilization and some degree of fairness among flows. However, as the Internet has evolved to encompass all of society, such a cooperative behavior from enduser applications is not always granted. Applications may simply act selfishly to be more competitive through bandwidth abuse. Bandwidth starvation may also arise unintentionally depending on the nature of traffic sources. The ensuing impact can be severe fairness hazard and even congestion collapse. Router-based queue management schemes driven by fairness objectives thus become an inescapable necessity for fairly sharing network resources.Given a significant volume of literature relating to fairnessdriven queue management schemes, there has remained a need for a broader and coherent survey. This paper presents a systematic and comprehensive review of eminent fairness-driven queue management schemes from the inception of the concept and the preliminary work to the most recent work. We present a new taxonomy of categorizing fairness-driven queue management schemes. We discuss design approaches and key attributes of these schemes and provide their comparison and analysis. Based on the outcomes of this survey, we discuss a number of open issues and provide generic design guidelines and future directions for the research in this field. Fairness-Driven Queue Management: A Survey and Taxonomy 2 c packets/s Scheduling algorithm Dequeueend B packets Buffer k l 1 l Enqueueend Output link Input links Queue management algorithm mechanisms at all, either deliberately or by accident, and generate misbehaving traffic [9]. Furthermore, there are applications that selfishly improve throughput by splitting a single TCP connection into multiple connections [10], [3]. All such applications and the resulting traffic aggregates are potentially dangerous as they inflict unfairness in the network, and can eventually cause congestion collapse [9], [11].In response to these problems, there has been a long history, dating back to [12], of realizing that routers play a significant role in fair bandwidth allocation. The technical report by Floyd and Fall [13] (later published as [3]) is, however, the first one to extensively demonstrate the danger of unfairness due to unresponsive flows. Floyd and Fall [13] argue that the incentives for cooperative behavior can only come from the network itself, and therefore, routers inevitably need to deploy mechanisms to provide an incentive structure for applications to use end-to-end congestion control. The report also proposes queue management based techniques for identifying and restricting unresponsive flows. Since then, a number of fairness-driven queue management schemes have been proposed to shield responsive flows and to regulate unresponsive and aggressive flows.This paper provid...

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fairness-Driven Queue Management: A Survey and Taxonomy

Abbas

Halim

Abbas

2016

IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A mean could hide unfairness, as positive and negative values of U n would cancel out, but that is not a concern here, as we have only two flows and for one of them we show the flow-NRU directly. (A more detailed account of the NRU and its use can be found in [4]. )…”

Section: Normalised Resource Usage (Nru)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Like other studies, e.g., [4,5,11], we have used only two flows and assumed that both flows are like file-transfers: highly asymmetric in data-flow, are relatively long-lived, and send a continuous stream of packets. However, shortlived flows (e.g.…”

Section: Limitations and Future Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[3,12]. However, the JFI has some properties that means it may not provide a suitable evaluation metric [4]:…”

Section: Jain's Fairness Index (Jfi)mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In order to provide a richer view of the fairness information, we introduce a metric which is based on the ratio of resource usage of an individual flow with respect to its expected capability: the Normalised Resource Usage (NRU) [4]. The NRU metric, U n (t), for a flow n with throughput r n (t) at time t is defined in terms of the Resource Share Ratio (RSR), R n (t):…”

Section: Normalised Resource Usage (Nru)mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effects of On-path Buffering on TCP Fairness

Bhatti

Bateman

2009

2009 International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Keeping router buffering low helps minimise delay (as well as keeping router costs low), whilst increasing buffering minimises loss. This is a trade-off for which there is no single 'correct' solution. In order to maintain effective throughput for TCP, whilst minimising router buffer requirements, current results suggest that different amounts of buffering are needed depending on the position in the network (e.g., edge or core), and on the relative capacity of ingress and egress links to a router. However, today we have several different variants of TCP in use, and each is designed to have different behaviour especially on paths with high bandwidth-delay product (BDP) values. We use a testbed to investigate the effects of different amounts of 'onpath' buffering (OPB) on the performance of four TCP variants -TCP NewReno, BIC, CUBIC, and Compound TCPover various end-to-end round-trip-times (RTTs). Specifically, we consider how the variants respond when competing for bandwidth on a bottleneck link. We find that overall performance depends on both the RTT and the OPB provision, and that the observed behaviour is not consistent across the range of RTT and OPB values.

show abstract

TCP Testing: How Well Does ns2 Match Reality?

Bateman

Bhatti

2010

2010 24th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Revisiting inter-flow fairness

Cited by 7 publications

References 21 publications

Fairness-Driven Queue Management: A Survey and Taxonomy

Fairness-Driven Queue Management: A Survey and Taxonomy

Effects of On-path Buffering on TCP Fairness

TCP Testing: How Well Does ns2 Match Reality?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About