skip to main content
article

TCP-Peach: a new congestion control scheme for satellite IP networks

Authors Info & Claims
Published:01 June 2001Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Current TCP protocols have lower throughput performance in satellite networks mainly due to the effects of long propagation delays and high link error rates. In this paper, a new congestion control scheme called TCP-Peach is introduced for satellite networks. TCP-Peach is composed of two new algorithms, namely Sudden Start and Rapid Recovery, as well as the two traditional TCP algorithms, Congestion Avoidance and Fast Retransmit. The new algorithms are based on the novel concept of using dummy segments to probe the availability of network resources without carrying any new information to the sender. Dummy segments are treated as low-priority segments and accordingly they do not effect the delivery of actual data traffic. Simulation experiments show that TCP-Peach outperforms other TCP schemes for satellite networks in terms of goodput. It also provides a fair share of network resources.

References

  1. 1 J.S. Ahn, E B. Danzig, Z. Liu, and L. Yan, "Evaluation of TCP Vegas: Emulation and experiment," in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, Aug. 1995, pp. 185-196.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. 2 I. E Akyildiz and S.-H. Jeong, "Satellite ATM networks: A survey," IEEE Commun. Mug., vol. 35, pp. 30-43, July 1997.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. 3 I. E Akyildiz and I. Joe, "A new ATM adaptation layer for TCP/IP over wireless ATM networks," ACM-Baltzer J. Wireless Networks, vol. 6, no. 3, June 2000.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. 4 M. Allman, S. Floyd, and C. Partridge, "Increasing TCPs initial window,", Interact RFC 2414, 1998.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. 5 M. Allman, D. Glover, and L. Sanchez, "Enhancing TCP over satellite channels using standard mechanism,", Internet RFC 2488, 1999.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. 6 M. Allman et al., "Ongoing TCP research related to satellites,", RFC 2760, Feb. 2000.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. 7 A. Bakre and B. R. Badrinath, "I-TCP: Indirect TCP for mobile hosts," in Proc. 15th Int. Conf. Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), May 1995, pp. 136-143.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. 8 H. Balakrishnan, S. Seshan, E. Amir, and R. H. Katz, "Improving TCP/IP performance over wireless networks," in Proc. ACM Mobicom, Nov. 1995, pp. 2-15.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. 9 H. Balakrishnan, S. Seshan, and R. H. Katz, "Improving reliable transport protocol and handoff performance in cellular wireless networks," ACM-Baltzer Wireless Networks J., vol. 1, no. 4, pp. 469-481, Dec. 1995.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. 10 H. Balakrishnan, V. N. Padmanabhan, S. Seshan, and R. H. Katz, "A comparison of mechanisms for improving TCP performance over wireless links," IEEE/ACM Trans. Networking, vol. 5, Dec. 1997.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. 11 Y. Bernett et al., "A framework for differentiated services,", Interact draft, draft-ietf-diffserv-framework-02.txt, Feb. 1999.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. 12 G. Bianchi, A. Capone, and C. Petrioli, "Throughput analysis of end-to-end measurement-based admission control in IP," in Proc. IEEE lnfocom, Mar. 2000.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. 13 R. Braden, "Requirements for Internet hosts-communication layers,", STD 3, IETF 1122, Oct. 1989.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. 14 L. Brakmo, S. O'Malley, and L. Peterson, "TCP Vegas: New techniques for congestion detection and avoidance," in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, Aug. 1994, pp. 24-35.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. 15 L. Brakmo and L. Peterson, "TCP Vegas: End to end congestion avoidance on a global Internet," 1EEE J. Select. Areas Commun., vol. 13, pp. 1465-1480, Oct. 1995.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. 16 R. Caceres and L. Iftode, "Improving the performance of reliable transport protocols in mobile computing environments," IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun., vol. 13, pp. 850-857, June 1995.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. 17 {Online}. Available: http://www.cisco.com.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. 18 S. Dawkins, G. Montenegro, M. Kojo, V. Magret, and N. Vaidya, "End-to-end performance implications of links with errors,", Interact draft, work in progress, Mar. 2000.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. 19 S. Deering and R. Hinden, "Interact protocol version 6 (IPv6) specification,", IETF RFC 2460, Dec. 1998.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. 20 R. C. Durst, G. J. Miller, and E. J. Travis, "TCP extensions for space communications," in Proc. ACM Mobicom, Nov. 1996.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. 21 S. Floyd. (1995, Feb.) TCP and successive fast retransmits. {Online}. Available: ftp://ftp.ee.lbl.gov/papers/fastretrans.ps]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. 22 K. Fall and S. Floyd, "Simulation-based comparisons of Tahoe, Reno and SACK TCE" ACM Computer Commun. Rev., vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 5-12, July 1996.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. 23 S. Floyd and K. Fall, "Promoting the use of end-to-end congestion control in the Internet," IEEE/ACM Trans. Networking, vol. 7, pp. 458-472, Aug. 1999.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. 24 R. Fox, "TCP big window and nac options,", Request for Comments 1106, IETF, June 1989.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. 25 T.R. Henderson and R. H. Katz, "Transport protocols for Internet-compatible satellite networks," IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun., vol. 17, pp. 326-344, Feb. 1999.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. 26 J. Hoe, "Improving the start-up behavior of a congestion control scheme for TCE" in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, Aug. 1996, pp. 270-280.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. 27 V. Jacobson, "Congestion avoidance and control," in Proc. ACM SIG- COMM, Aug. 1988, pp. 314-329.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. 28 ---, "Congestion avoidance and control,", Tech. Rep., Apr. 1990.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. 29 S. Keshav and S. Morgan, "SMART retransmission: performance with overload and random losses," in Proc. IEEE lnfocom, Apr. 1997, pp. 1131-1138.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. 30 T. V. Lakshman and U. Madhow, "The performance of TCP/IP for networks with high bandwidth-delay products and random loss," 1EEE/ACM Trans. Networking, vol. 5, June 1997.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. 31 M. Mathis, J. Mahdavi, S. Floyd, and A. Romanow. (1996, Apr.) TCP selective acknowledgment options. {Online}. Available: ftp:ftp.ietf.cnri.reston.va.us/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-tcplw-sack-00.txt]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. 32 M. Mathis and J. Mahdavi, "Forward acknowledgment: Refining TCP congestion control," in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, Aug. 1996, pp. 281-291.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. 33 C. Metz, ''TCP over satellite... The final frontier," IEEE Internet Comput., pp. 76-80, Jan./Feb. 1999.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. 34 G. Morabito, I. E Akyildiz, and S. Palazzo, ''TCP-Peach: Analytical model and performance evaluation," Int. J. Satellite Commun., to be published.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. 35 G. Morabito and I. E Akyildiz, ''TCP-Peach: Experimental results," Georgia Tech., Atlanta, GA, Tech. Rep., May 2000.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. 36 V. N. Padmanabhan and R. Katz, ''TCP Fast Start: A technique for speeding up web transfer," in Proc. IEEE Globecom, Nov. 1998.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. 37 C. Partridge and T. J. Shepard, ''TCP/IP performance over satellite links," IEEE Network Mug., pp. 44 49, Sept./Oct. 1997.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. 38 J. Postel, "DoD Standard Internet Protocol,", IETF RFC 760, Jan. 1980.]] Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. 39 W. Stevens, TCP/IP Illustrated. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1994, vol. 1.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. TCP-Peach: a new congestion control scheme for satellite IP networks

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader