Interaction or interference: can AQM and low priority congestion control successfully collaborate?

YiXi Gong, D. Rossi, C. Testa, S. Valenti, M. D. Taht
{"title":"Interaction or interference: can AQM and low priority congestion control successfully collaborate?","authors":"YiXi Gong, D. Rossi, C. Testa, S. Valenti, M. D. Taht","doi":"10.1145/2413247.2413263","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Heterogeneity in the Internet ecosystem sometimes turns interaction into interference. Over the years, active queue management (AQM) and end-to-end low-priority congestion control (LPCC) have been proposed as alternative solutions to counter the persistently full buffer problem -- that recently became popular under the \"bufferbloat\" term.\n In this work, we point out the existence of a negative interplay among AQM and LPCC techniques. Intuitively, as AQM is designed to penalize the most aggressive flows it mainly hit best effort TCP: it follows that LPCC is not able to maintain its low priority, thus becoming as aggressive as TCP. By an extended set of simulation on various AQM policies and LPCC protocols, including the very recent CoDel AQM and LEDBAT LPCC proposals, we point out that this interference is quite universal and deserves further attention.","PeriodicalId":185637,"journal":{"name":"CoNEXT Student '12","volume":"885 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-12-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"CoNEXT Student '12","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/2413247.2413263","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7

Abstract

Heterogeneity in the Internet ecosystem sometimes turns interaction into interference. Over the years, active queue management (AQM) and end-to-end low-priority congestion control (LPCC) have been proposed as alternative solutions to counter the persistently full buffer problem -- that recently became popular under the "bufferbloat" term. In this work, we point out the existence of a negative interplay among AQM and LPCC techniques. Intuitively, as AQM is designed to penalize the most aggressive flows it mainly hit best effort TCP: it follows that LPCC is not able to maintain its low priority, thus becoming as aggressive as TCP. By an extended set of simulation on various AQM policies and LPCC protocols, including the very recent CoDel AQM and LEDBAT LPCC proposals, we point out that this interference is quite universal and deserves further attention.
交互或干扰:AQM和低优先级拥塞控制能否成功协作?
互联网生态系统的异质性有时会使互动变成干扰。多年来,主动队列管理(AQM)和端到端低优先级拥塞控制(LPCC)已被提出作为对抗缓冲区持续满的问题的替代解决方案——该问题最近以“bufferbloat”一词流行起来。在这项工作中,我们指出了AQM和LPCC技术之间存在负相互作用。直观地说,由于AQM被设计为惩罚最激进的流,它主要打击最佳努力TCP:因此LPCC无法维持其低优先级,因此变得像TCP一样激进。通过对各种AQM策略和LPCC协议的扩展模拟,包括最近的CoDel AQM和LEDBAT LPCC提案,我们指出这种干扰是相当普遍的,值得进一步关注。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书