Transport layer multihoming for fault tolerance in FCS networks

Caro, Armando; Amer, Paul D.; Stewart, Randall

doi:10.1109/milcom.2003.1290285

Cited by 12 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This paper combines and extends results published by the authors in three incremental conference publications [5][6][7], thereby documenting the complete development of this research. Section 2 demonstrates the problem with SCTPs current retransmission policy (AllRtxAlt) by comparing it to an alternative policy, AllRtxSame (All Retransmissions to Same).…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 57%

“…Similarly, when the alternate path's quality is worse, we expect sending retransmissions to the same destination as their original transmission should provide better performance. To test these hypotheses, we evaluate the performance of AllRtxAlt and the AllRtxSame policy-send all retransmissions to the same destination as their original transmission [6].…”

Section: Allrtxalt's Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Retransmission policies for multihomed transport protocols

Armando

Amer

Stewart

2006

Computer Communications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We evaluate three retransmission policies for transport protocols that support multihoming (e.g. SCTP). The policies dictate whether retransmissions are sent to the same peer IP address as the original transmission, or sent to an alternate peer IP address. Each policy presents tradeoffs based on the paths' bandwidth, delay, loss rate, and IP destination reachability. We find that sending all retransmissions to an alternate peer IP address is useful when the primary IP address becomes unreachable, but often degrades performance in non-failure scenarios. On the other hand, sending all retransmissions to the same peer IP address as the original transmission reverses the tradeoffs. We balance the tradeoffs by proposing a hybrid policy that sends fast retransmissions to the same peer IP address as the original transmission, and sends timeout retransmissions to an alternate peer IP address. We show that even with extensions which we proposed to improve the policies' performance, the hybrid policy is the best performing policy in failure and non-failure scenarios. q

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 57%

Section: Allrtxalt's Problemmentioning

confidence: 99%

Retransmission policies for multihomed transport protocols

Armando

Amer

Stewart

2006

Computer Communications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Similarly, we expect that when the conditions are better on an alternate destination's path, performance will improve if the alternate destination is used for retransmissions. However, the results in [4] show that often the latter is not the case.…”

Section: The Problemmentioning

confidence: 95%

“…Hence, SCTP retransmits to an alternate destination address in attempt to avoid another loss of the same data. However, SCTP's current retransmission policy has been shown to actually degrade performance in many circumstances [4]. Given the analysis in [4], we evaluate five potential solutions to the problem.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Retransmission policies with transport layer multihoming

Caro

Amer

Iyengar

et al.

The 11th IEEE International Conference on Networks, 2003. ICON2003.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-We evaluate several retransmission policies for transport protocols that support multihoming, such as SCTP. We find that schemes that attempt to improve the chance of success by retransmitting to an alternate peer IP address often degrade performance. Our results show that for better performance, new data transmissions and retransmissions should be sent to the same peer IP address. We also find that our Multiple Fast Retransmit algorithm further improves performance by reducing the number of timeouts. Since our results assume reachability of all peer IP addresses, we conclude with suggestions for scenarios where failures are possible. We suggest compromising some of the performance improvements to avoid performance degradation during failures.

show abstract

On Explicit Congestion Notification for Stream Control Transmission Protocol in Lossy Networks

Saadawi

Lee

2005

Cluster Comput

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As a congestion avoidance mechanism, Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) is designed to inform a data source to react to potential congestion early. Currently, the new transport protocol, Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP), is not ECN-capable. An ECN-capable SCTP is proposed in this paper, which is bandwidth-efficient and robust to non-congestion losses. An SCTP source needs to adjust its congestion window when receiving ECN messages. We find the optimal value of the congestion window for an SCTP source in response to ECN messages, and develop a simple and practical method to achieve this optimal congestion window. Both simulation results and analysis are provided to support the effectiveness of the proposed ECN mechanism for SCTP. The simplified method in achieving the optimal congestion window is attractive because the total goodput performance of SCTP associations or the bottleneck link utilization is not sensitive to the window reduction policies when the network load is heavy. Using complicated methods to fine-tune SCTP or TCP's congestion window in response to congestion indications may not be worth the increase in complexity of the protocol.

show abstract

Transport layer multihoming for fault tolerance in FCS networks

Cited by 12 publications

References 8 publications

Retransmission policies for multihomed transport protocols

Retransmission policies for multihomed transport protocols

Retransmission policies with transport layer multihoming

On Explicit Congestion Notification for Stream Control Transmission Protocol in Lossy Networks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About