[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/ Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

A stateless fairness-driven active queue management scheme for efficient and fair bandwidth allocation in congested Internet routers

  • Published:
Telecommunication Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Fair bandwidth sharing is important for the Internet architecture to be more accommodative of the heterogeneity. The Internet relies primarily on the end-systems to cooperatively deploy congestion control mechanisms for achieving high network utilization and some degree of fairness among flows. However, the cooperative behavior may be abandoned by some end-systems that act selfishly to be more competitive through bandwidth abuse. The result can be severe unfairness and even congestion collapse. Fairness-driven active queue management, thus, becomes essential for allocating the shared bottleneck bandwidth fairly among competing flows. This paper proposes a novel stateless active queue management algorithm, termed CHOKeH, to enforce fairness in bottleneck routers. CHOKeH splits the queue into dynamic regions at each packet arrival and treats each region differently for performing matched-drops using a dynamically updated drawing factor, which is based on the level of queue occupancy and the buffer size. In this way, CHOKeH can effectively identify and restrict unfair flows from dominating the bandwidth by discarding more packets from these flows. The performance of CHOKeH is studied through extensive simulations. The results demonstrate that CHOKeH is well suited for fair bandwidth allocation even in the presence of multiple unresponsive flows and across a wider range of buffer sizes. The results also show the ability of CHOKeH to provide inter-protocol and intra-protocols fairness and protection for short-lived flows. With a low per-packet-processing complexity, CHOKeH is amenable to implementation in core routers to offer an effective incentive structure for end-systems to self-impose some form of congestion control.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
£29.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (United Kingdom)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  1. Hasegawa, G., & Murata, M. (2001). Survey on fairness issues in TCP congestion control mechanisms. IEICE Transactions on Communications, E84–B(6), 1461–1472.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Abbas, G., Halim, Z., & Abbas, Z. (2016). Fairness-driven queue management: A survey and taxonomy.IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials, 18(1), First Quarter, 324–367.

  3. Gevros, P., Crowcroft, J., Kirstein, P., & Bhatti, S. (2001). Congestion control mechanisms and the best effort service model. IEEE Network, 15(3), 16–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Braden, B., Clark, D., Crowcroft, J., Davie, B., Deering, S., Estrin, D., et al. (1998). Recommendations on queue management and congestion avoidance in the Internet. IETF RFC 2309. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2309. Accessed 25 Oct 2015.

  5. Floyd, S. (2000). Congestion control principles. IETF RFC 2914, BCP 41. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc2914. Accessed 25 Oct 2015.

  6. Papadimitriou, D., Welzl, M., Scharf, M., & Briscoe, B. (2011). Open research issues in Internet congestion control.IETF RFC 6077. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6077. Accessed 25 Oct 2015.

  7. Baker, F., & Fairhurst, G. (2015). IETF recommendations regarding active queue management. IETF RFC 7567, BCP 197. http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7567. Accessed 25 Oct 2015.

  8. Abbas, G., Nagar, A. K., & Tawfik, H. (2011). On unified quality of service resource allocation scheme with fair and scalable traffic management for multiclass Internet services. IET Communications, 5(16), 2371–2385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Xue, L., Kumar, S., Cui, C., & Park, S.-J. (2014). A study of fairness among heterogeneous TCP variants over 10Gbps high-speed optical networks. Optical Switching and Networking, 13, 124–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Floyd, S., & Fall, K. (1999). Promoting the use of end-to-end congestion control in the Internet. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 7(4), 458–472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Adams, R. (2013). Active queue management: a survey. IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials, 15(3), Third Quarter, 1425–1476.

  12. Chatranon, G., Labrador, M. A., & Banerjee, S. (2004). A survey of TCP-friendly router-based AQM schemes. Computer Communications, 27(15), 1424–1440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Lin, D., & Morris, R. (1997). Dynamics of random early detection. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 27(4), 127–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Vukadinović, V., & Trajković, L. (2004). RED with dynamic thresholds for improved fairness. In Proceedings 19th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing, SAC’04, March 14–17, Nicosia, Cyprus, (pp. 371–372).

  15. Ramaswamy, V., Cuellar, L., Eidenbenz, S., & Hengartner, N. (2007). Preventing bandwidth abuse at the router through sending rate estimate-based active queue management. In Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Communications, ICC’07, June 24–28, Glasgow, Scotland, (pp. 569–574).

  16. Aldabbagh, G., Rio, M., & Darwazeh, I. (2010). Fair early drop: An active queue management scheme for the control of unresponsive flows. In Proceedings IEEE 10th International Conference on Computer and Information Technology, CIT’10, 29 June–01 July, Bradford, UK, (pp. 2668–2675).

  17. Nossenson, R., & Maryuma, H. (2012). Active queue management in blind access networks. In Proceedings Third International Conference on Access Networks, ACCESS’12, June 24–29, Venice, Italy, (pp. 27–30).

  18. Latré, S., Meerssche, W. V., Deschrijver, D., Papadimitriou, D., Dhaene, T., & Turck, F. D. (2013). A cognitive accountability mechanism for penalizing misbehaving ECN-based TCP stacks. International Journal of Network Management, 23(1), 16–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Hwang, J., & Byun, S.-S. (2015). A resilient buffer allocation scheme in active queue management: A stochastic cooperative game theoretic approach. International Journal of Communication Systems, 28(6), 1080–1099.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Chan, M.-K., & Hamdi, M. (2003). An active queue management scheme based on a capture–recapture model. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 21(4), 572–583.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Pan, R., Breslau, L., Prabhakar, B., & Shenker, S. (2003). Approximate fairness through differential dropping. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 33(2), 23–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Yi, S., Deng, X., Kesidis, G., & Das, C. R. (2008). A dynamic quarantine scheme for controlling unresponsive TCP sessions. Telecommunication Systems, 37(4), 169–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Chen, S., Bensaou, B., & Hung, K. L. (2009). Promoting self-imposed end-to-end congestion control via a Sword of Damocles approach. In Proceedings IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications, ISCC’09, July 5–8, Sousse, Tunisia, (pp. 600–605).

  24. Abbas, G., Nagar, A. K., Tawfik, H., & Goulermas, J. Y. (2010). Pricing and unresponsive flows purging for global rate enhancement. Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering, 2010(379652), 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Alvarez-Flores, E. P., Ramos-Munoz, J. J., Ameigeiras, P., & Lopez-Soler, J. M. (2011). Selective packet dropping for VoIP and TCP flows. Telecommunication Systems, 46(1), 1–16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Yu, C., & Lin, C. (2012). A novel algorithm to achieve bandwidth fairness of RED with packet size consideration. In Proceedings 7th IEEE Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications, ICIEA’12, July 18–20, Singapore, (pp. 659–662).

  27. Pan, R., Prabhakar, B., & Psounis, K. (2000). CHOKe—A stateless active queue management scheme for approximating fair bandwidth allocation. In Proceedings 19th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies, INFOCOM’00, March 26–30, Tel Aviv, Israel, 2, (pp. 942–951).

  28. Ho, C.-Y., Chan, Y.-C., & Chen, Y.-C. (2007). WARD: a transmission control protocol-friendly stateless active queue management scheme. IET Communications, 1(6), 1179–1186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Wen, S., Fang, Y., & Sun, H. (2009). Differentiated bandwidth allocation with TCP protection in core routers. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 20(1), 34–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Dimitriou, S., Tsioliaridou, A., & Tsaoussidis, V. (2010). Introducing size-oriented dropping policies as QoS-supportive functions. IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management, 7(1), 14–27.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Kesselman, A., & Leonardi, S. (2012). Game-theoretic analysis of Internet switching with selfish users. Theoretical Computer Science, 452, 107–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Eshete, A., & Jiang, Y. (2013). Generalizing the CHOKe flow protection. Computer Networks, 57(1), 147–161.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Lu, L., Du, H., & Liu, R. P. (2014). CHOKeR: A novel AQM algorithm with proportional bandwidth allocation and TCP protection. IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, 10(1), 637–644.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Domański, A., Domańska, J., & Klamka, J. (2013). Analysis of CHOKe-family active queue management. Theoretical and Applied Informatics, 25(1), 49–66.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Jiang, Y., Hamdi, M., & Liu, J. (2003). Self adjustable CHOKe: an active queue management algorithm for congestion control and fair bandwidth allocation. InProceedings 8th IEEE International Symposium on Computers and Communication, ISCC’03, June 30–July 03, Antalya, Turkey, (pp. 1018–1025).

  36. Floyd, S., & Jacobson, V. (1993). Random early detection gateways for congestion avoidance. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 1(4), 397–413.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Sen, A. (1973). On economic inequality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  38. Feknous, M., Houdoin, T., Le Guyader, B., De Biasio, J., Gravey, A., & Gijón, J. A. T. (2014). Internet traffic analysis: A case study from two major European operators, In Proceedings 19th IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications, ISCC–2014, June 23–26, Madeira, Portugal, (pp. 1–7).

  39. Zhang, Q., Ma, Y., Wang, J., & Li, X. (2014). UDP traffic classification using most distinguished port, In Proceedings 16th Asia-Pacific Network Operations and Management Symposium, APNOMS–2014, September 17–19, Hsincshu, Taiwan, (pp. 1–4).

  40. Irwin, B., & Nkhumaleni, T. (2015). Observed correlations of unsolicited network traffic over five distinct IPv4 netblocks. In Proceedings 10th International Conference on Cyber Warfare and Security, ICCWS–2015, March 24–25, South Africa, (pp. 135–143).

  41. Jain, R. (1991). The art of computer systems performance analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Miras, D., Bateman, M., & Bhatti, S. (2008). Fairness of high-speed TCP stacks. In Proceedings 22nd IEEE International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications, AINA’08, March 25–28, Okinawa, Japan, (pp. 84–92).

  43. Brakmo, L. S., & Peterson, L. L. (1995). TCP Vegas: End to end congestion avoidance on a global Internet. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 13(8), 1465–1480.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Jacobson, V. (1990). Modified TCP congestion avoidance algorithm. end2end-interest mailing list. ftp://ftp.isi.edu/end2end/end2end-interest-1990.mail. Accessed 25 Oct 2015.

  45. Chen, S., Zhou, Z., & Bensaou, B. (2007). Stochastic RED and its applications. InProceedings IEEE International Conference on Communications, ICC’07, 24–28 June, Glasgow, Scotland, (pp. 6362–6367).

  46. Andrew, L., Marcondes, C., Floyd, S., Dunn, L., Guillier, R., Gang, W., Eggert, L., Ha, S., & Rhee, I. (2008). Towards a common TCP evaluation suite. In Proceedings 6th International Workshop on Protocols for FAST Long-Distance Networks, PFLDnet’08, March 5–7 . Manchester, UK, (pp. 1–5).

  47. Lakshman, T. V., & Madhow, U. (1997). The performance of TCP/IP for networks with high bandwidth-delay products and random loss. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 5(3), 336–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Pan, R., Natarajan, P., Piglione, C., Prabhu, M. S., Subramanian, V., Baker, F., & VerSteeg, B. (2013). PIE: A lightweight control scheme to address the bufferbloat problem. In Proceedings IEEE 14th International Conference on High Performance Switching and Routing, HPSR’13, July 8–11, Taipei, Taiwan, (pp. 148–155).

  49. Villamizar, C., & Song, C. (1994). High performance TCP in ANSNET. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 24(5), 45–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Wischik, D., & McKeown, N. (2005). Part I: Buffer sizes for core routers. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 35(3), 75–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Beheshti, N., Ganjali, Y., Rajaduray, R., Blumenthal, D., & McKeown, N. (2006). Buffer sizing in all-optical packet switches. In Proceedings Optical Fiber Communication Conference, OFC’06, OThF8, March 5–10, Anaheim, CA, USA, (pp. 1–3).

  52. Beheshti, N., Burmeister, E., Ganjali, Y., Bowers, J. E., Blumenthal, D. J., & McKeown, N. (2010). Optical packet buffers for backbone Internet routers. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 18(5), 1599–1609.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Malangadan, N., Rahman, H., & Raina, G. (2013). Non-linear oscillations in TCP networks with Drop-Tail buffers. In Proceedings 25th Chinese Control and Decision Conference, CCDC’13, May 25–27, Guiyang, China, (pp. 188–194).

  54. Vishwanath, A., Sivaraman, V., & Rouskas, G. N. (2009). Considerations for sizing buffers in optical packet switched networks. In Proceedings 28th IEEE Conference on Computer Communications, INFOCOM’09, April 19–25, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, (pp. 1323–1331).

  55. Gharakheili, H. H., Vishwanath, A., & Sivaraman, V. (2015). Comparing edge and host traffic pacing in small buffer networks. Computer Networks, 77, 103–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Gettys, J. (2011). Bufferbloat: Dark buffers in the Internet. IEEE Internet Computing, 15(3), 95–96. doi:10.1109/MIC.2011.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Computer Sciences and Engineering, GIK Institute of Engineering Sciences and Technology, Topi, 23640, Pakistan

    Ghulam Abbas & Masroor Hussain

  2. Faculty of Computer Science, Information Technology University, Lahore, Pakistan

    Sanaullah Manzoor

Authors
  1. Ghulam Abbas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sanaullah Manzoor
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Masroor Hussain
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ghulam Abbas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Abbas, G., Manzoor, S. & Hussain, M. A stateless fairness-driven active queue management scheme for efficient and fair bandwidth allocation in congested Internet routers. Telecommun Syst 67, 3–20 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11235-017-0306-3

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11235-017-0306-3

Keywords