Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article

The Great Internet TCP Congestion Control Census

Published: 17 December 2019 Publication History

Abstract

In 2016, Google proposed and deployed a new TCP variant called BBR. BBR represents a major departure from traditional congestion-window-based congestion control. Instead of using loss as a congestion signal, BBR uses estimates of the bandwidth and round-trip delays to regulate its sending rate. The last major study on the distribution of TCP variants on the Internet was done in 2011, so it is timely to conduct a new census given the recent developments around BBR. To this end, we designed and implemented Gordon, a tool that allows us to measure the exact congestion window (cwnd) corresponding to each successive RTT in the TCP connection response of a congestion control algorithm. To compare a measured flow to the known variants, we created a localized bottleneck where we can introduce a variety of network changes like loss events, bandwidth change, and increased delay, and normalize all measurements by RTT. An offline classifier is used to identify the TCP variant based on the cwnd trace over time. Our results suggest that CUBIC is currently the dominant TCP variant on the Internet, and it is deployed on about 36% of the websites in the Alexa Top 20,000 list. While BBR and its variant BBR G1.1 are currently in second place with a 22% share by website count, their present share of total Internet traffic volume is estimated to be larger than 40%. We also found that Akamai has deployed a unique loss-agnostic rate-based TCP variant on some 6% of the Alexa Top 20,000 websites and there are likely other undocumented variants. The traditional assumption that TCP variants "in the wild" will come from a small known set is not likely to be true anymore. We predict that some variant of BBR seems poised to replace CUBIC as the next dominant TCP variant on the Internet.

References

[1]
Andrea Baiocchi, Angelo P Castellani, and Francesco Vacirca. 2007. YeAH-TCP: yet another highspeed TCP. In Proceedings of PFLDnet .
[2]
Lawrence S. Brakmo, Sean W. O'Malley, and Larry L. Peterson. 1994. TCP Vegas: New Techniques for Congestion Detection and Avoidance. In Proceedings of SIGCOMM .
[3]
Neal Cardwell, Yuchung Cheng, C. Stephen Gunn, Soheil Hassas Yeganeh, and Van Jacobson. 2017a. BBR: Congestion-based Congestion Control . CACM, Vol. 60, 2 (2017), 58--66.
[4]
Neal Cardwell, Yuchung Cheng, Soheil Hassas Yeganeh, and Van Jacobson. 2017b. BBR Congestion Control . IETF Draft. (2017). https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-cardwell-iccrg-bbr-congestion-control-00
[5]
Neal Cardwell, Yuchung Cheng, Soheil Hassas Yeganeh, Ian Swett, Victor Vasiliev, Priyaranjan Jha, Yousuk Seung, Matt Mathis, and Van Jacobson. 2019. BBR v2 - A Model-based Congestion Control . ICCRG at IETF 104. (2019). https://bit.ly/2HgGOuQ
[6]
Claudio Casetti, Mario Gerla, Saverio Mascolo, Medy Y Sanadidi, and Ren Wang. 2002. TCP Westwood: end-to-end congestion control for wired/wireless networks. Wireless Networks, Vol. 8, 5 (2002), 467--479.
[7]
Xiaoyu Chen, Shugong Xu, Xudong Chen, Shan Cao, Shunqing Zhang, and Yanzan Sun. 2019. Passive TCP Identification for Wired and Wireless Networks: A Long-Short Term Memory Approach . arXiv preprint:1904.04430 (2019).
[8]
Yuchung Cheng, Neal Cardwell, Nandita Dukkipati, and Priyaranjan Jha. 2019. RACK: a time-based fast loss detection algorithm for TCP . IETF Draft. (2019). https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tcpm-rack-05
[9]
Douglas E. Comer and John C. Lin. 1994. Probing TCP Implementations. In Proceedings of USTC .
[10]
DARPA. 1981. Internet Protocol. RFC 791. (1981).
[11]
Sally Floyd. 2003. HighSpeed TCP for Large Congestion Windows . RFC 3649. (2003).
[12]
Cheng Peng Fu and S. C. Liew. 2006. TCP Veno: TCP Enhancement for Transmission over Wireless Access Networks . IEEE JSAC, Vol. 21, 2 (2006), 216--228.
[13]
Sangtae Ha, Injong Rhee, and Lisong Xu. 2008. CUBIC: A New TCP-friendly High-speed TCP Variant . SIGOPS Operating Systems Review, Vol. 42, 5 (2008), 64--74.
[14]
Desta H. Hagos, Paal E. Engelstad, Anis Yazidi, and Øivind Kure. 2018. General TCP State Inference Model From Passive Measurements Using Machine Learning Techniques. IEEE Access, Vol. 6 (2018), 28372--28387.
[15]
Mario Hock, Roland Bless, and Martina Zitterbart. 2017. Experimental Evaluation of BBR Congestion Control. Proceedings of ICNP.
[16]
Alexa Internet Inc. 2018. The Top 500 websites on the Internet. (2018). https://www.alexa.com/topsites
[17]
Yuchung Cheng Jerry Chu, Nandita Dukkipati and Matt Mathis. 2013. Increasing TCP's Initial Window . RFC 6928. (2013).
[18]
Tom Kelly. 2003. Scalable TCP: Improving Performance in Highspeed Wide Area Networks. SIGCOMM CCR, Vol. 33, 2 (2003), 83--91.
[19]
Douglas Leith, R Shorten, and Y Lee. 2005. H-TCP: A framework for congestion control in high-speed and long-distance networks. In Proceedings of PFLDnet .
[20]
Shao Liu, Tamer Bacsar, and R. Srikant. 2006. TCP-Illinois: A Loss and Delay-based Congestion Control Algorithm for High-speed Networks. In Proceedings of VALUETOOLS .
[21]
Ralf Lübben and Markus Fidler. 2016. On characteristic features of the application level delay distribution of TCP congestion avoidance. In Proceedings of ICC .
[22]
Alberto Medina, Mark Allman, and Sally Floyd. 2005. Measuring the Evolution of Transport Protocols in the Internet. SIGCOMM CCR, Vol. 35, 2 (2005), 37--52.
[23]
Ravi Netravali, Anirudh Sivaraman, Somak Das, Ameesh Goyal, Keith Winstein, James Mickens, and Hari Balakrishnan. 2015. Mahimahi: Accurate Record-and-Replay for HTTP . Proceedings of ATC .
[24]
Netfilter Organization. 2019. libnetfilter_queue. (2019). https://bit.ly/2HimY17
[25]
Jitendra Padhye and Sally Floyd. 2001. On Inferring TCP Behavior. In Proceedings of SIGCOMM .
[26]
Vern Paxson and Mark Allman. 2009. TCP Congestion Control . RFC 5681. (2009).
[27]
Brien Posey. 2019. Explore the Cubic congestion control provider for Windows. (2019). https://bit.ly/2VfhxoA
[28]
GNU Project. 2019. wget. (2019). https://www.gnu.org/software/wget
[29]
Jan Rüth, Christian Bormann, and Oliver Hohlfeld. 2017. Large-scale scanning of TCP's initial window. In Proceedings of IMC .
[30]
Canada Sandvine Inc. Waterloo, ON. 2018. The 2018 Global Internet Phenomena Report. (2018). https://www.sandvine.com/phenomena
[31]
W. Sun, L. Xu, and S. Elbaum. 2018. Scalably Testing Congestion Control Algorithms of Real-World TCP Implementations. In Proceedings of ICC .
[32]
Kun Tan, Jingmin Song, Qian Zhang, and Murad Sridharan. 2006. A compound TCP approach for high-speed and long distance networks. In Proceedings of INFOCOM .
[33]
Ranysha Ware, Matthew K. Mukerjee, Srinivasan Seshan, and Justine Sherry. 2019. Modeling BBR's Interactions with Loss-Based Congestion Control. In Proceedings of IMC .
[34]
David X Wei, Cheng Jin, Steven H Low, and Sanjay Hegde. 2007. FAST TCP. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.
[35]
Lisong Xu, K. Harfoush, and Injong Rhee. 2004. Binary increase congestion control (BIC) for fast long-distance networks. In Proceedings of INFOCOM .
[36]
Peng Yang, Juan Shao, Wen Luo, Lisong Xu, Jitendra Deogun, and Ying Lu. 2011. TCP Congestion Avoidance Algorithm Identification. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, Vol. 22, 4 (2011), 1311--1324.
[37]
Peng Yang and Lisong Xu. 2011. A survey of deployment information of delay-based TCP congestion avoidance algorithm for transmitting multimedia data. In Proceedings of GLOBECOM Workshops .

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)To switch or not to switch to TCP Prague? Incentives for adoption in a partial L4S deploymentProceedings of the 2024 Applied Networking Research Workshop10.1145/3673422.3674896(45-52)Online publication date: 23-Jul-2024
  • (2024)CCAnalyzer: An Efficient and Nearly-Passive Congestion Control ClassifierProceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM 2024 Conference10.1145/3651890.3672255(181-196)Online publication date: 4-Aug-2024
  • (2024)Prudentia: Findings of an Internet Fairness WatchdogProceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM 2024 Conference10.1145/3651890.3672229(506-520)Online publication date: 4-Aug-2024
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Proceedings of the ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems
Proceedings of the ACM on Measurement and Analysis of Computing Systems  Volume 3, Issue 3
SIGMETRICS
December 2019
525 pages
EISSN:2476-1249
DOI:10.1145/3376928
Issue’s Table of Contents
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 17 December 2019
Published in POMACS Volume 3, Issue 3

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. congestion control
  2. measurement study

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Funding Sources

  • Singapore NRF

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)224
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)28
Reflects downloads up to 04 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)To switch or not to switch to TCP Prague? Incentives for adoption in a partial L4S deploymentProceedings of the 2024 Applied Networking Research Workshop10.1145/3673422.3674896(45-52)Online publication date: 23-Jul-2024
  • (2024)CCAnalyzer: An Efficient and Nearly-Passive Congestion Control ClassifierProceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM 2024 Conference10.1145/3651890.3672255(181-196)Online publication date: 4-Aug-2024
  • (2024)Prudentia: Findings of an Internet Fairness WatchdogProceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM 2024 Conference10.1145/3651890.3672229(506-520)Online publication date: 4-Aug-2024
  • (2024)Keeping an Eye on Congestion Control in the Wild with NebbyProceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM 2024 Conference10.1145/3651890.3672223(136-150)Online publication date: 4-Aug-2024
  • (2024)Dragonfly: In-Flight CCA IdentificationIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management10.1109/TNSM.2024.338041721:3(2675-2685)Online publication date: 1-Jun-2024
  • (2024)P4BS: Leveraging Passive Measurements From P4 Switches to Dynamically Modify a Router’s Buffer SizeIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management10.1109/TNSM.2023.330633521:1(1082-1099)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2024
  • (2024)Fairness Improvement of Different TCP Congestion Control Algorithms Using P4 Programmable Data Plane2024 IEEE Pacific Rim Conference on Communications, Computers and Signal Processing (PACRIM)10.1109/PACRIM61180.2024.10690198(1-6)Online publication date: 21-Aug-2024
  • (2024)Machine learning-based estimation of the number of competing flows at a bottleneck linkNOMS 2024-2024 IEEE Network Operations and Management Symposium10.1109/NOMS59830.2024.10574929(1-4)Online publication date: 6-May-2024
  • (2024)Demo: The Impact of LEO Satellite Network Instabilities on the Performance of Networking Applications2024 IEEE 49th Conference on Local Computer Networks (LCN)10.1109/LCN60385.2024.10639672(1-4)Online publication date: 8-Oct-2024
  • (2024)BBR vs. BBRv2: A Performance Evaluation2024 16th International Conference on COMmunication Systems & NETworkS (COMSNETS)10.1109/COMSNETS59351.2024.10427175(379-387)Online publication date: 3-Jan-2024
  • Show More Cited By

View Options

Get Access

Login options

Full Access

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media