HSTCP

Abstract: In October of '86, the Internet had the first of what became a series of 'congestion collapses'. During this period, the data throughput from LBL to UC Berkeley (sites separated by 400 yards and three IMP hops) dropped from 32 Kbps to 40 bps. Mike Karels1 and I were fascinated by this sudden factor-of-thousand drop in bandwidth and embarked on an investigation of why things had gotten so bad. We wondered, in particular, if the 4.3BSD (Berkeley UNIX) TCP was mis-behaving or if it could be tuned to work better under abysmal network conditions. The answer to both of these questions was “yes”.Since that time, we have put seven new algorithms into the 4BSD TCP: round-trip-time variance estimationexponential retransmit timer backoffslow-startmore aggressive receiver ack policydynamic window sizing on congestionKarn's clamped retransmit backofffast retransmit Our measurements and the reports of beta testers suggest that the final product is fairly good at dealing with congested conditions on the Internet.This paper is a brief description of (i) - (v) and the rationale behind them. (vi) is an algorithm recently developed by Phil Karn of Bell Communications Research, described in [KP87]. (viii) is described in a soon-to-be-published RFC.Algorithms (i) - (v) spring from one observation: The flow on a TCP connection (or ISO TP-4 or Xerox NS SPP connection) should obey a 'conservation of packets' principle. And, if this principle were obeyed, congestion collapse would become the exception rather than the rule. Thus congestion control involves finding places that violate conservation and fixing them.By 'conservation of packets' I mean that for a connection 'in equilibrium', i.e., running stably with a full window of data in transit, the packet flow is what a physicist would call 'conservative': A new packet isn't put into the network until an old packet leaves. The physics of flow predicts that systems with this property should be robust in the face of congestion. Observation of the Internet suggests that it was not particularly robust. Why the discrepancy?There are only three ways for packet conservation to fail: The connection doesn't get to equilibrium, orA sender injects a new packet before an old packet has exited, orThe equilibrium can't be reached because of resource limits along the path. In the following sections, we treat each of these in turn.

Abstract: This paper considers the potentially negative impacts of an increasing deployment of non-congestion-controlled best-effort traffic on the Internet. These negative impacts range from extreme unfairness against competing TCP traffic to the potential for congestion collapse. To promote the inclusion of end-to-end congestion control in the design of future protocols using best-effort traffic, we argue that router mechanisms are needed to identify and restrict the bandwidth of selected high-bandwidth best-effort flows in times of congestion. The paper discusses several general approaches for identifying those flows suitable for bandwidth regulation. These approaches are to identify a high-bandwidth flow in times of congestion as unresponsive, "not TCP-friendly", or simply using disproportionate bandwidth. A flow that is not "TCP-friendly" is one whose long-term arrival rate exceeds that of any conformant TCP in the same circumstances. An unresponsive flow is one failing to reduce its offered load at a router in response to an increased packet drop rate, and a disproportionate-bandwidth flow is one that uses considerably more bandwidth than other flows in a time of congestion.

Abstract: Vegas is an implementation of TCP that achieves between 37 and 71% better throughput on the Internet, with one-fifth to one-half the losses, as compared to the implementation of TCP in the Reno distribution of BSD Unix. This paper motivates and describes the three key techniques employed by Vegas, and presents the results of a comprehensive experimental performance study, using both simulations and measurements on the Internet, of the Vegas and Reno implementations of TCP. >

Abstract: The purpose of this document is to advance NewReno TCP's Fast Retransmit and Fast Recovery algorithms in RFC 2582 from Experimental to Standards Track status.