Logo PTI Logo FedCSIS

Communication Papers of the 18th Conference on Computer Science and Intelligence Systems

Annals of Computer Science and Information Systems, Volume 37

Experimental Assessment of MPTCP Congestion Control Algorithms for Streaming Services in Open Internet

, ,

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15439/2023F9991

Citation: Communication Papers of the 18th Conference on Computer Science and Intelligence Systems, M. Ganzha, L. Maciaszek, M. Paprzycki, D. Ślęzak (eds). ACSIS, Vol. 37, pages 359–364 ()

Full text

Abstract. Efficient data transfer is required in various fields such as entertainment, business communications, image processing systems, and industrial applications. A fast speed, low latency, and stable transmission parameters are required to ensure high-quality streaming, which is difficult to achieve with a single data channel. Using multiple communication paths is a promising solution for elevating performance. The Multipath TCP (MPTCP) protocol allows for splitting the application stream among a few connections. A key element determining the overall transmission quality is the MPTCP congestion control algorithm. In this paper, the most common MPTCP congestion control algorithms are evaluated in the open Internet in the context of streaming applications. The results obtained indicate that for a streaming service that utilizes multiple paths the most effective pair of CC algorithms are BALIA at the MPTCP level and BBR at the path level. These algorithms provide the smallest path delay and Head-of-Line blocking degree under consistent throughput. Delay-based wVegas shows the weakest performance in terms of multipath streaming.

References

  1. Cisco, “Cisco Annual Internet Report (2018-2023) White Paper, “ 2020. [Online]. Available: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/collateral/executive-perspectives/annual-internet-report/white-paper-c11-741490.html
  2. C. Raiciu, M. J. Handley, and D. Wischik, “Coupled Congestion Control for Multipath Transport Protocols, “ Request for Comments, no. 6356, RFC Editor, Oct. 2011. [Online]. Available: https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6356, http://dx.doi.org/10.17487/RFC6356.
  3. M. Morawski and P. Ignaciuk, “Choosing a Proper Control Strategy for Multipath Transmission in Industry 4.0 Applications," IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 3609-3619, 2022, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TII.2021.3105499.
  4. C. Paasch, S. Ferlin, O. Alay, and O. Bonaventure, “Experimental Evaluation of Multipath TCP Schedulers,” Proceedings of the 2014 ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Capacity Sharing Workshop, CSWS ’14, Chicago, Illinois, USA, 2014, pp. 27-32, http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2630088.2631977.
  5. M. Barreiros and P. Lundqvist, “QoS-Enabled Networks: Tools and Foundations,” Wiley & Sons, 2016.
  6. M. Morawski and P. Ignaciuk, “Network nodes play a game – a routing alternative in multihop ad-hoc environments,” Comp. Netw., vol. 122, pp. 96-104, 2017, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2017.04.031.
  7. J. Qadir, A. Ali, K. A. Yau, A. Sathiaseelan, and J. Crowcroft, “Exploiting the power of multiplicity: a holistic survey of network-layer multipath,” IEEE Commun. Surv. Tut., vol. 17, no. 4, pp. 2176-2213, “4Q”, 2015, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2015.2453941.
  8. M. Li et al., “Multipath Transmission for the Internet: A Survey, “ IEEE Commun. Surv. Tut., vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 2887-2925, Q4, 2016 , http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2016.2586112.
  9. S. Barré, C. Paasch, and O. Bonaventure, “MultiPath TCP: From theory to practice, “ Tech. Report, Université Catholique de Louvain, 2011, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20757-0_35.
  10. A. Ford, C. Raiciu, M. Handley and O. Bonaventure, “TCP extensions for multipath operation with multiple addresses,” RFC 6824, 2013, http://dx.doi.org/10.17487/RFC6824.
  11. S. Barré and C. Paasch, “MultiPath TCP – Linux kernel implementation,” http://www.multipath-tcp.org.
  12. M. Morawski and P.Ignaciuk, “A green multipath TCP framework for Industrial Internet of Things applications,” Comp. Netw., vol. 187, 107831, 2021, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2021.107831.
  13. K. Yedugundla, S. Ferlin, T. Dreibholz, Ö. Alay, N. Kuhn, P. Hurtig, and A. Brunstrom, "Is multipath transport suitable for latency sensitive traffic?, “ Comp. Netw., vol. 105, pp. 1-21, 2016, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.comnet.2016.05.008.
  14. C. Paasch, S., Ferlin, O., Alay and O., Bonaventure, “Experimental evaluation of multipath TCP schedulers,” Proc. on ACM SIGCOMM CSWS, pp. 27–32, 2014, Chicago, USA, http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/2630088.2631977.
  15. M. Morawski and. P. Ignaciuk, “Energy-efficient scheduler for MPTCP data transfer with independent and coupled channels,” Comp. Commun., vol. 132, pp. 56-64, 2018, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.comcom.2018.09.008.
  16. C. Xu, J. Zhao, G. Muntean, “Congestion control design for multipath transport protocols: A survey,” IEEE Commun. Surv. Tut., vol. 18, no. 4, pp. 2948–2969, 2016, , http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/COMST.2016.2558818.
  17. T. Henderson, S. Floyd, A. Gurtov, and Y. Nishida, “The NewReno modification to TCP's fast recovery algorithm,” RFC 6582, Apr. 2012, http://dx.doi.org/10.17487/RFC3782.
  18. N. Cardwell, Y. Cheng, C. S. Gunn, S. H. Yeganeh and V. Jacobson, “BBR: Congestion-Based Congestion Control: Measuring Bottleneck Bandwidth and Round-Trip Propagation Time,” Queue, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 20-53, Sep.-Oct. 2016, http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3012426.3022184.
  19. C. Raiciu, M. J. Handley and D. Wischik, “Coupled Congestion Control for Multipath Transport Protocols,” RFC 6356, RFC Editor, Oct. 2011, pp. 1-12, http://dx.doi.org/10.17487/RFC6356.
  20. N. Gast, R. Khalili, J.-Y. Le Boudec and M. Popovic, “Opportunistic Linked-Increases Congestion Control Algorithm for MPTCP,” Proceedings of the 13th International IFIP Networking Conference (Networking), Trondheim, Norway, 2014, pp. 1-9.
  21. Q. Peng, A. Walid, J. Hwang, and S. H. Low, “Multipath TCP: Analysis, Design, and Implementation, “ IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 596-609, 2016, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TNET.2014.2379698.
  22. Y. Cao, M. Xu, and X. Fu, “Delay-based congestion control for multipath TCP, “, 2012 20th IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP), pp. 1-10, 2012, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/ICNP.2012.6459943.
  23. R. Khalili, N. Gast, M. Popovic, and J.-Y. Le Boudec, “MPTCP is not Pareto-optimal: performance issues and a possible solution,” IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw., vol. 21, no 5, pp. 1651-1665, 2013, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TNET.2013.2274462.
  24. S. Grzyb and P. Orłowski, “Congestion feedback control for computer networks with bandwidth estimation, “, 2015 20th International Conference on Methods and Models in Automation and Robotics (MMAR), pp. 1151-1156, 2015, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MMAR.2015.7284041.