Re: TCP ex Machina
Keith Winstein <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.end2end |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAMzhQmM2nPkBNGDrLrhf4CNLgORZm_r_y6gnZs_JK19T5qivEw@mail.gmail.com> |
Thanks, Jon, I think the analogy to the Axelrod experiment is quite apt! Wish I had thought of that myself. :-) Similar to Axelrod, my dream is to have a "kaizen for congestion" where anybody could contribute a new algorithm and we would evaluate it vs. the existing schemes and see how it performs on different kinds of benchmark networks, and then add it to these same plots. Detlef, I'm afraid I don't think your email quite summarized our approach accurately. We do not give the optimizer advance information about who wants to send what to whom and we don't calculate an optimized "schedule." Remy develops rules for a TCP sender; e.g. when to increase the window and by how much, when/how to decrease the window, when to enforce a minimum interval between outgoing packets (a pacer) and what that interval should be. It tries to find the best rules for a given set of assumptions specified explicitly -- e.g., what are the range of possible networks the protocol is intended for, and what is the goal. We model the arrival and departure of flows as drawn from some stochastic process, e.g., flows are "on" for some amount of time or some number of bytes, drawn from an exponential or Pareto distribution or from an empirical CDF of flow lengths on the Internet. The traffic model given to Remy at design time usually is not the same as the case we then evaluate in ns-2 when comparing against the other schemes. Regarding wireless links, you might be interested in some of our prior work (http://alfalfa.mit.edu) that shows one can achieve considerable gains by modeling the link speed variation of cellular networks as a simple stochastic process, then making conservative predictions about future link speeds at the endpoints in order to compromise between throughput and delay. Best regards, Keith On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 5:14 PM, Jon Crowcroft <[email protected]>wrote: > it is a tiny bit cleverer than that - the work is the moral equivalent of > the Axelrod experiment in emergent cooperation, but neater because it is > quantitative rather than just qualitative selection of strategies - what is > important (imho) is that they use many many simulation runs to evaluate a > "fitness" of a given protocol...this is heavy lifting, but pays off - so it > will be nice to see empirical follow up work but this isn't some naive > "overfitting" undergrad work - it is rather different and requires a > considered response > > > On Sun, Jul 21, 2013 at 9:28 PM, Detlef Bosau <[email protected]> wrote: > > > To my understanding, you write down the whole communication (who wants to > > sent what to whom) and afterwards you calculate an optimized schedule. > > > > Reminds me of undergraduate homework in operating systems, gantt diagrams > > and that funny stuff. > > > > You cannot predict your link's properties (e.g. in the case of wireless > > links), you cannot predict your user's behaviour, so you conjecture a lot > > from presumptions which hardly ever will hold. > > > > Frankly spoken: This route leads to nowhere. > > > > > > -- > > ------------------------------**------------------------------**------ > > Detlef Bosau > > Galileistraße 30 > > 70565 Stuttgart Tel.: +49 711 5208031 > > mobile: +49 172 6819937 > > skype: detlef.bosau > > ICQ: 566129673 > > [email protected] http://www.detlef-bosau.de > > > > >