66
1 End to End Protocols

End to End Protocols

  • Upload
    tait

  • View
    36

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

End to End Protocols. End to End Protocols. We already saw: basic protocols Stop & wait (Correct but low performance) Now: Window based protocol. Go Back N Selective Repeat TCP protocol. UDP protocol. Pipelining: sender allows multiple, “in-flight”, yet-to-be-acknowledged pkts - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: End to End  Protocols

1

End to End Protocols

Page 2: End to End  Protocols

2

End to End Protocols

We already saw: basic protocols Stop & wait (Correct but low performance)

Now: Window based protocol.

• Go Back N• Selective Repeat

TCP protocol. UDP protocol.

Page 3: End to End  Protocols

3

Pipelined protocols

Pipelining: sender allows multiple, “in-flight”, yet-to-be-acknowledged pkts range of sequence numbers must be increased buffering at sender and/or receiver

Two generic forms of pipelined protocols: go-Back-N, selective repeat

Page 4: End to End  Protocols

4

Go Back N (GBN)

Page 5: End to End  Protocols

5

Go-Back-NSender: k-bit seq # in pkt header “window” of up to N, consecutive unack’ed pkts allowed

ACK(n): ACKs all pkts up to, including seq # n - “cumulative ACK” may deceive duplicate ACKs (see receiver)

timer for each in-flight pkt timeout(n): retransmit pkt n and all higher seq # pkts in window

Page 6: End to End  Protocols

6

GBN: sender extended FSM

Page 7: End to End  Protocols

7

GBN: receiver extended FSM

receiver simple: ACK-only: always send ACK for correctly-received pkt with

highest in-order seq # may generate duplicate ACKs need only remember expectedseqnum

out-of-order pkt: discard (don’t buffer) -> no receiver buffering! ACK pkt with highest in-order seq #

Page 8: End to End  Protocols

8

GBN inaction

Page 9: End to End  Protocols

9

GBN - correctness

Safety: The sequence

numbers guarantee: packet received in

order. No gaps. No duplicates. Safety follows from

extectedsequencenum Next seg. Received exactly once.

Liveness: Eventually timeout. Re-sends the window. Eventually base is

received correctly.

Receiver: from that time ACK at

least base. Eventually an ACK will

get through. The sender will

update to Base (or more).

Page 10: End to End  Protocols

10

GBN - correctness

Clearing a FIFO channel:

Data k

Ack k

impossible

Data i<k

Ack i<k

impossible

Claim: After receiving Data/ACK k no Data/ACK i<k is received.

Sufficient to use N+1 seq. num.

Page 11: End to End  Protocols

11

Selective Repeat

Page 12: End to End  Protocols

12

Selective Repeat

receiver individually acknowledges all correctly received pkts buffers pkts, as needed, for eventual in-order delivery to upper

layer

sender only resends pkts for which ACK not received sender timer for each unACKed pkt

sender window N consecutive seq #’s again limits seq #s of sent, unACKed pkts

Page 13: End to End  Protocols

13

Selective repeat: sender, receiver windows

Page 14: End to End  Protocols

14

Selective repeat

data from above : if next available seq # in

window, send pkt

timeout(n): resend pkt n, restart

timer

ACK(n) in [sendbase,sendbase+N]:

mark pkt n as received if n smallest unACKed

pkt, advance window base to next unACKed seq #

senderpkt n in [rcvbase, rcvbase+N-

1]

send ACK(n) out-of-order: buffer in-order: deliver (also

deliver buffered, in-order pkts), advance window to next not-yet-received pkt

pkt n in [rcvbase-N,rcvbase-1]

ACK(n)

otherwise: ignore

receiver

Page 15: End to End  Protocols

15

Selective repeat in action

Page 16: End to End  Protocols

16

Selective Repeat - Correctness Infinite seq. Num.

Safety: immediate from the seq. Num. Liveness: Eventually data and ACKs get

through. Finite Seq. Num.

Idea: Re-use seq. Num. Use less bits to encode them.

Number of seq. Num.: At least N. Needs more!

Page 17: End to End  Protocols

17

Selective repeat: dilemma

Example: seq #’s: 0, 1, 2, 3 window size=3

receiver sees no difference in two scenarios!

incorrectly passes duplicate data as new in (a)

Q: what relationship between seq # size and window size?

Page 18: End to End  Protocols

18

Choosing the window size

Small window size: idle link (under-utilization).

Large window size: Buffer space Delay after loss

Ideal window size (assuming very low loss) RTT =Round trip time C = link capacity window size = RTT * C

What happens with no loss?

Page 19: End to End  Protocols

19

End to End Protocols:

Multiplexing &Demultiplexing

Page 20: End to End  Protocols

20

applicationtransportnetwork

MP2

applicationtransportnetwork

Multiplexing/demultiplexing

Recall: segment - unit of data exchanged between transport

layer entities aka TPDU: transport

protocol data unitreceiver

HtHn

Demultiplexing: delivering received segments (TPDUs)to correct app layer processes

segment

segment Mapplicationtransportnetwork

P1M

M MP3 P4

segmentheader

application-layerdata

Page 21: End to End  Protocols

21

Multiplexing/demultiplexing

multiplexing/demultiplexing: based on sender, receiver port

numbers, IP addresses source, dest port #s in each

segment recall: well-known port

numbers for specific applications

gathering data from multiple app processes, enveloping data with header (later used for demultiplexing)

source port # dest port #

32 bits

applicationdata

(message)

other header fields

TCP/UDP segment format

Multiplexing:

Page 22: End to End  Protocols

22

Multiplexing/demultiplexing: examples

host A server Bsource port: xdest. port: 23

source port:23dest. port: x

port use: simple telnet app

WWW clienthost A

WWWserver B

WWW clienthost C

Source IP: CDest IP: B

source port: x

dest. port: 80

Source IP: CDest IP: B

source port: y

dest. port: 80

port use: WWW server

Source IP: ADest IP: B

source port: x

dest. port: 80

Page 23: End to End  Protocols

23

TCP Protocol

Page 24: End to End  Protocols

24

TCP: Overview RFCs: 793, 1122, 1323, 2018, 2581

full duplex data: bi-directional data flow in

same connection MSS: maximum segment

size

connection-oriented: handshaking (exchange of

control msgs) init’s sender, receiver state before data exchange

flow controlled: sender will not overwhelm

receiver

point-to-point: one sender, one receiver

reliable, in-order byte steam: no “message boundaries”

pipelined: TCP congestion and flow

control set window size

Page 25: End to End  Protocols

25

TCP segment structure

source port # dest port #

32 bits

applicationdata

(variable length)

sequence number

acknowledgement numberrcvr window size

ptr urgent datachecksum

FSRPAUheadlen

notused

Options (variable length)

URG: urgent data (generally not used)

ACK: ACK #valid

PSH: push data now(generally not used)

RST, SYN, FIN:connection estab(setup, teardown

commands)

# bytes rcvr willingto accept

countingby bytes of data(not segments!)

Internetchecksum

Page 26: End to End  Protocols

26

TCP seq. #’s and ACKsSeq. #’s:

byte stream “number” of first byte in segment’s data

ACKs: seq # of next byte

expected from other side

cumulative ACK

Q: how receiver handles out-of-order segments A: TCP spec doesn’t

say, - up to implementor

Host A Host B

Seq=42, ACK=79, data = ‘C’

Seq=79, ACK=43, data = ‘C’

Seq=43, ACK=80

Usertypes

‘C’

host ACKsreceipt

of echoed‘C’

host ACKsreceipt of

‘C’, echoesback ‘C’

timesimple telnet scenario

Page 27: End to End  Protocols

27

TCP: reliable data transfer

simplified sender, assuming

waitfor

event

waitfor

event

event: data received from application above

event: timer timeout for segment with seq # y

event: ACK received,with ACK # y

create, send segment

retransmit segment

ACK processing

•one way data transfer•no flow, congestion control

Page 28: End to End  Protocols

28

TCP: reliable data transfer

00 sendbase = initial_sequence number 01 nextseqnum = initial_sequence number 0203 loop (forever) { 04 switch(event) 05 event: data received from application above 06 create TCP segment with sequence number nextseqnum 07 start timer for segment nextseqnum 08 pass segment to IP 09 nextseqnum = nextseqnum + length(data) 10 event: timer timeout for segment with sequence number y 11 retransmit segment with sequence number y 12 compue new timeout interval for segment y 13 restart timer for sequence number y 14 event: ACK received, with ACK field value of y 15 if (y > sendbase) { /* cumulative ACK of all data up to y */ 16 cancel all timers for segments with sequence numbers < y 17 sendbase = y 18 } 19 else { /* a duplicate ACK for already ACKed segment */ 20 increment number of duplicate ACKs received for y 21 if (number of duplicate ACKS received for y == 3) { 22 /* TCP fast retransmit */ 23 resend segment with sequence number y 24 restart timer for segment y 25 } 26 } /* end of loop forever */

SimplifiedTCPsender

Page 29: End to End  Protocols

29

TCP ACK generation [RFC 1122, RFC 2581]

Event

in-order segment arrival, no gaps,everything else already ACKed

in-order segment arrival, no gaps,one delayed ACK pending

out-of-order segment arrivalhigher-than-expect seq. #gap detected

arrival of segment that partially or completely fills gap

TCP Receiver action

delayed ACK. Wait up to 500msfor next segment. If no next segment,send ACK

immediately send singlecumulative ACK

send duplicate ACK, indicating seq. #of next expected byte

immediate ACK if segment startsat lower end of gap

Page 30: End to End  Protocols

30

TCP: retransmission scenarios

Host A

Seq=92, 8 bytes data

ACK=100

loss

tim

eout

time lost ACK scenario

Host B

X

Seq=92, 8 bytes data

ACK=100

Host A

Seq=100, 20 bytes data

ACK=100

Seq=

92

tim

eout

time premature timeout,cumulative ACKs

Host B

Seq=92, 8 bytes data

ACK=120

Seq=92, 8 bytes data

Seq=

10

0 t

imeou

t

ACK=120

Page 31: End to End  Protocols

31

TCP Flow Controlreceiver: explicitly

informs sender of (dynamically changing) amount of free buffer space RcvWindow field

in TCP segmentsender: keeps the

amount of transmitted, unACKed data less than most recently received RcvWindow

sender won’t overrun

receiver’s buffers bytransmitting too

much, too fast

flow control

receiver buffering

RcvBuffer = size or TCP Receive Buffer

RcvWindow = amount of spare room in Buffer

Page 32: End to End  Protocols

32

TCP Round Trip Time and TimeoutQ: how to set TCP

timeout value? longer than RTT

note: RTT will vary too short: premature

timeout unnecessary

retransmissions too long: slow

reaction to segment loss

Q: how to estimate RTT? SampleRTT: measured time

from segment transmission until ACK receipt ignore retransmissions,

cumulatively ACKed segments

SampleRTT will vary, want estimated RTT “smoother” use several recent

measurements, not just current SampleRTT

Page 33: End to End  Protocols

33

TCP Round Trip Time and TimeoutEstimatedRTT = (1-x)*EstimatedRTT + x*SampleRTT

Exponential weighted moving average influence of given sample decreases exponentially fast typical value of x: 0.1

Setting the timeout EstimtedRTT plus “safety margin” large variation in EstimatedRTT -> larger safety margin

Timeout = EstimatedRTT + 4*Deviation

Deviation = (1-x)*Deviation + x*|SampleRTT-EstimatedRTT|

Page 34: End to End  Protocols

34

TCP Connection Management

Recall: TCP sender, receiver establish “connection” before exchanging data segments

initialize TCP variables: seq. #s buffers, flow control info

(e.g. RcvWindow) client: connection initiator Socket clientSocket = new

Socket("hostname","port number"); server: contacted by client Socket connectionSocket =

welcomeSocket.accept();

Three way handshake:

Step 1: client sends TCP SYN control segment to server specifies initial seq #

Step 2: server receives SYN, replies with SYNACK control segment

ACKs received SYN allocates buffers specifies server-to-receiver

initial seq. #

Step 3: client sends ACK and data.

Page 35: End to End  Protocols

35

TCP Connection Management (cont.)

Closing a connection:

client closes socket: clientSocket.close();

Step 1: client end system sends TCP FIN control segment to server.

Step 2: server receives FIN, replies with ACK. Closes connection, sends FIN.

client

FIN

server

ACK

ACK

FIN

close

close

closed

tim

ed w

ait

Page 36: End to End  Protocols

36

TCP Connection Management (cont.)

Step 3: client receives FIN, replies with ACK.

Enters “timed wait” - will respond with ACK to received FINs

Step 4: server, receives ACK. Connection closed.

Note: with small modification, can handly simultaneous FINs.

client

FIN

server

ACK

ACK

FIN

closing

closing

closed

tim

ed w

ait

closed

Page 37: End to End  Protocols

37

TCP Connection Management (cont)

TCP clientlifecycle

TCP serverlifecycle

Page 38: End to End  Protocols

38

Principles of Congestion Control

Congestion: informally: “too many sources sending too

much data too fast for network to handle” different from flow control! manifestations:

lost packets (buffer overflow at routers) long delays (queueing in router buffers)

a top-10 problem!

Page 39: End to End  Protocols

39

Causes/costs of congestion: scenario 1

two senders, two receivers

one router, infinite buffers

no retransmission

large delays when congested

maximum achievable throughput

Page 40: End to End  Protocols

40

Causes/costs of congestion: scenario 2

one router, finite buffers sender retransmission of lost packet

Page 41: End to End  Protocols

41

Causes/costs of congestion: scenario 2 always: (goodput)

“perfect” retransmission only when loss:

retransmission of delayed (not lost) packet makes

larger (than perfect case) for same

in

out

=

in

out

>

in

out

“costs” of congestion: more work (retrans) for given “goodput” unneeded retransmissions: link carries multiple copies of pkt

Page 42: End to End  Protocols

42

Causes/costs of congestion: scenario 3 four senders multihop paths timeout/retransmit

in

Q: what happens as and increase ?

in

Page 43: End to End  Protocols

43

Causes/costs of congestion: scenario 3

Another “cost” of congestion: when packet dropped, any “upstream transmission capacity

used for that packet was wasted!

Page 44: End to End  Protocols

44

Approaches towards congestion control

End-end congestion control:

no explicit feedback from network

congestion inferred from end-system observed loss, delay

approach taken by TCP

Network-assisted congestion control:

routers provide feedback to end systems single bit indicating

congestion (SNA, DECbit, TCP/IP ECN, ATM)

explicit rate sender should send at

Two broad approaches towards congestion control:

Page 45: End to End  Protocols

45

Case study: ATM ABR congestion control

ABR: available bit rate:

“elastic service” if sender’s path

“underloaded”: sender should use

available bandwidth if sender’s path

congested: sender throttled to

minimum guaranteed rate

RM (resource management) cells:

sent by sender, interspersed with data cells

bits in RM cell set by switches (“network-assisted”) NI bit: no increase in rate

(mild congestion) CI bit: congestion

indication RM cells returned to sender

by receiver, with bits intact

Page 46: End to End  Protocols

46

Case study: ATM ABR congestion control

two-byte ER (explicit rate) field in RM cell congested switch may lower ER value in cell sender’ send rate thus minimum supportable rate on

path

EFCI bit in data cells: set to 1 in congested switch if data cell preceding RM cell has EFCI set, sender sets CI

bit in returned RM cell

Page 47: End to End  Protocols

47

TCP Congestion Control end-end control (no network assistance) transmission rate limited by congestion window size, Congwin,

over segments:

w segments, each with MSS bytes sent in one RTT:

throughput = w * MSS

RTT Bytes/sec

Congwin

Page 48: End to End  Protocols

48

TCP congestion control:

two “phases” slow start congestion avoidance

important variables: Congwin threshold: defines

threshold between two slow start phase, congestion control phase

“probing” for usable bandwidth: ideally: transmit as

fast as possible (Congwin as large as possible) without loss

increase Congwin until loss (congestion)

loss: decrease Congwin, then begin probing (increasing) again

Page 49: End to End  Protocols

49

TCP Slowstart

exponential increase (per RTT) in window size (not so slow!)

loss event: timeout (Tahoe TCP) and/or or three duplicate ACKs (Reno TCP)

initialize: Congwin = 1for (each segment ACKed) Congwin++until (loss event OR CongWin > threshold)

Slowstart algorithmHost A

one segment

RTT

Host B

time

two segments

four segments

Page 50: End to End  Protocols

50

TCP Congestion Avoidance

/* slowstart is over */ /* Congwin > threshold */Until (loss event) { every w segments ACKed: Congwin++ }threshold = Congwin/2Congwin = 1perform slowstart

Congestion avoidance

1

1: TCP Reno skips slowstart (fast recovery) after three duplicate ACKs

Tahoe

Reno

Page 51: End to End  Protocols

51

TCP FairnessFairness goal: if N TCP

sessions share same bottleneck link, each should get 1/N of link capacity

TCP congestion avoidance:

AIMD: additive increase, multiplicative decrease increase window by

1 per RTT decrease window

by factor of 2 on loss event

AIMD

TCP connection 1

bottleneckrouter

capacity R

TCP connection 2

Page 52: End to End  Protocols

52

Why is TCP fair?

Two competing sessions: Additive increase gives slope of 1, as throughout increases multiplicative decrease decreases throughput proportionally

R

R

equal bandwidth share

Connection 1 throughputConnect

ion 2

th

roughput

congestion avoidance: additive increaseloss: decrease window by factor of 2

congestion avoidance: additive increaseloss: decrease window by factor of 2

Page 53: End to End  Protocols

53

TCP strains

Tahoe

Reno

Vegas

Page 54: End to End  Protocols

54

Vegas

Page 55: End to End  Protocols

55

From Reno to Vegas

Reno Vegas

RTT measurem-t

coarse fine

Fast Retrans 3 dup ack Dup ack + timer

CongWin decrease

For each Fast Retrans.

For the 1st Fast Retrans. in RTT

Congestion detection

Loss detection Also based on measured thruput

Page 56: End to End  Protocols

56

Some more examples

Page 57: End to End  Protocols

57

TCP latency modeling

Q: How long does it take to receive an object from a Web server after sending a request?

TCP connection establishment

data transfer delay

Notation, assumptions: Assume one link between

client and server of rate R

Assume: fixed congestion window, W segments

S: MSS (bits) O: object size (bits) no retransmissions (no

loss, no corruption)Two cases to consider: WS/R > RTT + S/R: ACK for first segment in

window returns before window’s worth of data sent

WS/R < RTT + S/R: wait for ACK after sending window’s worth of data sent

Page 58: End to End  Protocols

58

TCP latency Modeling

Case 1: latency = 2RTT + O/R Case 2: latency = 2RTT + O/R+ (K-1)[S/R + RTT - WS/R]

K:= O/WS

Page 59: End to End  Protocols

59

TCP Latency Modeling: Slow Start

Now suppose window grows according to slow start. Will show that the latency of one object of size O is:

R

S

R

SRTTP

R

ORTTLatency P )12(2

where P is the number of times TCP stalls at server:

}1,{min KQP

- where Q is the number of times the server would stall if the object were of infinite size.

- and K is the number of windows that cover the object.

Page 60: End to End  Protocols

60

TCP Latency Modeling: Slow Start (cont.)

RTT

initia te TCPconnection

requestobject

first w indow= S /R

second w indow= 2S /R

third w indow= 4S /R

fourth w indow= 8S /R

com pletetransm issionobject

delivered

tim e atc lient

tim e atserver

Example:

O/S = 15 segments

K = 4 windows

Q = 2

P = min{K-1,Q} = 2

Server stalls P=2 times.

Page 61: End to End  Protocols

61

TCP Latency Modeling: Slow Start (cont.)

R

S

R

SRTTPRTT

R

O

R

SRTT

R

SRTT

R

O

stallTimeRTTR

O

P

kP

k

P

pp

)12(][2

]2[2

2latency

1

1

1

windowth after the timestall 2 1 kR

SRTT

R

S k

ementacknowledg receivesserver until

segment send tostartsserver whenfrom time RTTR

S

window kth the transmit totime2 1

R

Sk

RTT

initia te TCPconnection

requestobject

first w indow= S /R

second w indow= 2S /R

third w indow= 4S /R

fourth w indow= 8S /R

com pletetransm issionobject

delivered

tim e atc lient

tim e atserver

Page 62: End to End  Protocols

62

UDP Protocol

Page 63: End to End  Protocols

63

UDP: User Datagram Protocol [RFC 768]

“no frills,” “bare bones” Internet transport protocol

“best effort” service, UDP segments may be: lost delivered out of order to

app connectionless:

no handshaking between UDP sender, receiver

each UDP segment handled independently of others

Why is there a UDP? no connection establishment

(which can add delay) simple: no connection state at

sender, receiver small segment header no congestion control: UDP can

blast away as fast as desired

Page 64: End to End  Protocols

64

UDP: more

often used for streaming multimedia apps loss tolerant rate sensitive

other UDP uses (why?): DNS SNMP

reliable transfer over UDP: add reliability at application layer application-specific error

recover!

source port # dest port #

32 bits

Applicationdata

(message)

UDP segment format

length checksumLength, in

bytes of UDPsegment,including

header

Page 65: End to End  Protocols

65

UDP checksum

Sender: treat segment contents as

sequence of 16-bit integers checksum: addition (1’s

complement sum) of segment contents

sender puts checksum value into UDP checksum field

Receiver: compute checksum of received

segment check if computed checksum

equals checksum field value: NO - error detected YES - no error detected. But

maybe errors nonethless?

Goal: detect “errors” (e.g., flipped bits) in transmitted segment

Page 66: End to End  Protocols

66

Summary

principles behind transport layer services: multiplexing/

demultiplexing reliable data transfer flow control congestion control

instantiation and implementation in the Internet UDP TCP