1 / 25

Filipe Abrantes , João Taveira Araújo and Manuel Ricardo

2008 Feb 27. Flash Crowd Effect in RCP. Filipe Abrantes , João Taveira Araújo and Manuel Ricardo. Overview. Rate Control Protocol (RCP) Modelling RCP with Flow Arrivals Model Analysis Validation through Simulation Response to typical arrival distributions Conclusion.

finola
Télécharger la présentation

Filipe Abrantes , João Taveira Araújo and Manuel Ricardo

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. 2008 Feb 27 Flash Crowd Effect in RCP Filipe Abrantes, João Taveira Araújo and Manuel Ricardo

  2. Overview • Rate Control Protocol (RCP) • Modelling RCP with Flow Arrivals • Model Analysis • Validation through Simulation • Response to typical arrival distributions • Conclusion INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  3. Current Congestion Control (Context) • Embedded in TCP • Unstable • Inefficient • Increased delay • Limited fairness INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  4. Rate Control Protocol (RCP) • Explicit congestion control mechanism • New communication layer • (but can be embedded in TCP/IPv4 options, or IPv6 ext header) • Routers take an active role • High resolution explicit congestion information • Precise response (high util., near-zero delay) • Fast convergence time INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  5. Rate Control Protocol (RCP) • An RCP router computes a common rate R. • every flow bottlenecked at that router will use the rate R. • R is updated according to the spare bandwidth and the current outstanding queue • Instantaneous flow-fairness • No per-packet additions or multiplications required (unlike XCP) INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  6. Rate Control Protocol • Main Focus – Reducing Average Flow Completion Times (AFCT) • New flows jump-start to R (no slow start) • Reduces AFCT by 1 order to Reno, 2 orders to XCP • Each flow arrival causes temporary bandwidth overflow INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  7. Flash Crowds and RCP • We study the effect of Flash Crowds in RCP • Flash Crowd - significant and concentrated increase of the number of flows in the system. • When? • Events (Sports, Concerts, Political, ...) • Popular news sources (Slashdot, Digg, Del.icio.us, etc) • We should be able to characterise RCP behaviour in such cases • should assist system design. INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  8. RCP model • Simplifications • Abstract from packet granularity • Assume continuous control (rate adaptation is continuous) • Consider homogeneous delay (every flow has the same RTT) • Assume constant base delay (d0) • Nomenclature • y(t) represents input bandwidth • sum of the rate of all flows • d(t) represents system delay (RTT), for clarity we may only refer to it as d • d0 represents the base delay • q(t) represents queue length (persistent) • C represents bottleneck capacity INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  9. RCP model • Queue • Queue growth • Delay • Avg. Flow RTT • Input Bandwidth • Input BW Variation • RCP update equation Bandwidth Distributed each RTT(d) INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  10. Adding Dynamic Arrival of Flows • Growth rate (L) of the number of flows (N) each control interval • Revised dif. equation of input bandwidth • But d varies, L cannot be defined as constant growth • L itself affects d as we will see - recursive relation INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  11. Adding Dynamic Arrival of Flows • Growth rate (L) indexed to a fixed interval d_0 • Revised dif. equation of input bandwidth (Final) INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  12. What happens if the growth of traffic (flows) is constant? Queue builds to compensate the arrival of new flows Compensation Queue • Constant Growth Rate • Steady-State Conditions • Equilibrium property INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  13. RCP limits Stability limits for different β • Sustainable growth rate (L0) of flows is limited • Inversely proportional to β (approx) • β=0.226; Max Growth 6% each d0 (d0=base RTT) • 69% per second with RTT=100ms • β=0.4; Max Growth 12% each d0 • 312% per second with RTT=100ms INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  14. Model Validation • Start 5000 flows in periods of 5 to 20 seconds • Constant Growth L0 • d0=100 ms, C=1Gbit • Implemented on top of XCP present in ns-2 INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  15. Model Validation • Theory vs Sim (Steady-State) • Queue Length over Time (β=0.226) INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  16. How does L look like in typical distributions • We test 3 distributions • Laplace • Double exponential • Normal • Gaussian • Erlang Scheduled Events Spontaneous Events INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  17. How does L0 behave for typical arrival distributions - Laplace • b regulates the concentration of the arrivals INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  18. How does L0 behave for typical arrival distributions Higher peaks Laplace Normal Erlang INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  19. Distribution comparison • Laplace is the easier to control, Erlang the hardest • Steep increase rate of the number of flows, even if for a short period, easily unbalances the system severely • “Reasonable” (read below the stable limit) growth rate of the number of flows, even if persistent, is bearable • Conclusion • If we have the option to somehow shape the arrival of new calls try to follow a Laplace dist. (a form of slow start – exponential increase) INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  20. Possible counter measures • Embed some call admission mechanism in RCP to limit max L0 • A field in the RCP header could be used for that • Dynamically increase β • If queue average exceeds a certain threshold • If L0 exceeds the stable limit (if we can measure L0) INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  21. How does L0 translate to flash crowd size • RCP is able to absorb significant flash crowds β=0.226 β=0.4 INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  22. Study Limitations • Model Simplifications • Homogeneous rtt • Un-bounded queue • Negative queues not a problem • But upper bound should impact significantly • Convergence to steady-state (dynamic stability) • Not studied • Convergence will only occur for a region of values of α,β • Stable region is defined in other studies • Our simulations hint that the stable region is maintained in the presence of flash crowds INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  23. Conclusions • Presented an RCP model including the growth of the number of flows • Up to some growth limit, RCP “predicts” new flows by building up the queue • Able to accomodate significant flash crowds • Important that the flash crowd has a slow start • RCP deas best with Laplace dist., worse with Erlang-type dist. • The higher β is, the better RCP deals with the flash crowd (unsurprisingly) INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  24. Thank You Questions? INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

  25. INESC Porto, 25-02-2008

More Related