skip to main content
10.1145/633025.633054acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescommConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article
Free Access

End-to-end available bandwidth: measurement methodology, dynamics, and relation with TCP throughput

Published:19 August 2002Publication History

ABSTRACT

The available bandwidth (avail-bw) in a network path is of major importance in congestion control, streaming applications, QoS verification, server selection, and overlay networks. We describe an end-to-end methodology, called Self-Loading Periodic Streams (SLoPS), for measuring avail-bw. The basic idea in SLoPS is that the one-way delays of a periodic packet stream show an increasing trend when the stream's rate is higher than the avail-bw. We implemented SLoPS in a tool called pathload. The accuracy of the tool has been evaluated with both simulations and experiments over real-world Internet paths. Pathload is non-intrusive, meaning that it does not cause significant increases in the network utilization, delays, or losses. We used pathload to evaluate the variability ('dynamics') of the avail-bw in some paths that cross USA and Europe. The avail-bw becomes significantly more variable in heavily utilized paths, as well as in paths with limited capacity (probably due to a lower degree of statistical multiplexing). We finally examine the relation between avail-bw and TCP throughput. A persistent TCP connection can be used to roughly measure the avail-bw in a path, but TCP saturates the path, and increases significantly the path delays and jitter.

References

  1. M. Allman. Measuring End-to-End Bulk Transfer Capacity. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM Internet Measurement Workshop, Nov. 2001.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. M. Allman and V. Paxson. On Estimating End-to-End Network Path Properties. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, Sept. 1999.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. D. Andersen, H. Balakrishnan, F. Kaashoek, and R. Morris. Resilient Overlay Networks. In Proceedings of ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, Oct. 2001.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. A. A. Awadallah and C. Rai. TCP-BFA: Buffer Fill Avoidance. In Proceedings of IFIP High Performance Networking Conference, Sept. 1998.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. H. Balakrishnan, S. Seshan, M. Stemm, and R. H. Katz. Analyzing Stability in Wide-Area Network Performance. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMETRICS, June 1997.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. S. Banerjee and A. K. Agrawala. Estimating Available Capacity of a Network Connection. In Proceedings IEEE International Conference on Networks, Sept. 2001.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. J. C. Bolot and T.Turletti. A Rate Control Mechanism for Packet Video in the Internet. In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, pages 1216--1223, June 1994.]]Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. L. S. Brakmo, S. W. O'Malley, and L. L. Peterson. TCP Vegas: New Techniques for Congestion Detection and Avoidance. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, Aug. 1994.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. L. Breslau, E. Knightly, S. Shenker, I. Stoica, and H. Zhang. Endpoint Admission Control: Architectural Issues and Performance. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, 2000.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. R. L. Carter and M. E. Crovella. Measuring Bottleneck Link Speed in Packet-Switched Networks. Performance Evaluation, 27,28:297--318, 1996.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Y.-H. Chu, S. G. Rao, S. Seshan, and H. Zhang. Enabling Conferencing Applications on the Internet using an Overlay Multicast Architecture. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, Aug. 2001.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. C. Dovrolis, P. Ramanathan, and D. Moore. What do Packet Dispersion Techniques Measure? In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, pages 905--914, Apr. 2001.]]Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Downey. Using Pathchar to Estimate Internet Link Characteristics. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, Sept. 1999.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. N. Duffield, P.Goyal, A.Greenberg, P.Mishra, K.K.Ramakrishnan, and J.E.Merwe. A Flexible Model for Resource Management in Virtual Private Networks. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, Sept. 1999.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. K. M. Hanna, N. Natarajan, and B. N. Levine. Evaluation of a Novel Two-Step Server Selection Metric. In Proceedings International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP), Oct. 2001.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. J. Hoe. Improving the Start-up Behavior of a Congestion Control Scheme for TCP. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, Sept. 1996.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. V. Jacobson. Congestion Avoidance and Control. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, pages 314--329, Sept. 1988.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. V. Jacobson. Pathchar: A Tool to Infer Characteristics of Internet Paths. ftp://ftp.ee.lbl.gov/pathchar/, Apr. 1997.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. M. Jain and C. Dovrolis. Pathload: A measurement tool for end-to-end available bandwidth. In Proceedings of Passive and Active Measurements (PAM) Workshop, Mar. 2002.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. R. Jain. A delay-based approach for congestion avoidance in interconnected heterogeneous computer networks. ACM Computer Communications Review, 19(5):56--71, Oct. 1989.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. G. Jin, G. Yang, B. Crowley, and D. Agarwal. Network Characterization Service (NCS). In Proceedings of 10th IEEE Symposium on High Performance Distributed Computing, Aug. 2001.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. S. Keshav. A Control-Theoretic Approach to Flow Control. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, Sept. 1991.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. K. Lai and M.Baker. Measuring Bandwidth. In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM, Apr. 1999.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. K. Lai and M.Baker. Measuring Link Bandwidths Using a Deterministic Model of Packet Delay. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, Sept. 2000.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. T. V. Lakshman and U. Madhow. The performance of TCP/IP for networks with high bandwidth- delay products and random losses. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 5(3):336--350, June 1997.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. W. E. Leland, M. S. Taqqu, W. Willinger, and D. V. Wilson. On the Self-Similar Nature of Ethernet Traffic (Extended Version). IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 2(1):1--15, Feb. 1994.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. B. A. Mah. pchar: a Tool for Measuring Internet Path Characteristics. http://www.employees.org/~bmah/Software/pchar/, Feb. 1999.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. M. Mathis. TReno Bulk Transfer Capacity, Feb. 1999. IETF Internet Draft draft-ietf-ippm-treno-btc-03.txt (work-in-progress).]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. M. Mathis and M. Allman. A Framework for Defining Empirical Bulk Transfer Capacity Metrics, July 2001. RFC 3148.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. B. Melander, M. Bjorkman, and P. Gunningberg. A New End-to-End Probing and Analysis Method for Estimating Bandwidth Bottlenecks. In Global Internet Symposium, 2000.]]Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. D. Mitra and J. B. Seery. Dynamic adaptive windows for high-speed data networks: theory and simulations. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, Aug. 1990.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. NSv2. Network Simulator. http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns/.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. T. Oetiker. MRTG: Multi Router Traffic Grapher. http://ee-staff.ethz.ch/~oetiker/webtools/mrtg/mrtg.html.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  34. A. Pasztor and D. Veitch. The Packet Size Dependence of Packet Pair Like Methods. In IEEE/IFIP International Workshop on Quality of Service (IWQoS), 2002.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. V. Paxson. On Calibrating Measurements of Packet Transit Times. In Proceedings of ACM SIGMETRICS, June 1998.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. V. Paxson. End-to-End Internet Packet Dynamics. IEEE/ACM Transaction on Networking, 7(3):277--292, June 1999.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. V. Ribeiro, M. Coates, R. Riedi, S. Sarvotham, B. Hendricks, and R. Baraniuk. Multifractal Cross-Traffic Estimation. In Proceedings ITC Specialist Seminar on IP Traffic Measurement, Modeling, and Management, Sept. 2000.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Web100. Automatic Bandwidth Delay Product Discovery. http://www.web100.org/docs/archive/bdp.discovery.php, 2001.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Y. Zhang, N. Duffield, V. Paxson, and S. Shenker. On the Constancy of Internet Path Properties. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM Internet Measurement Workshop, Nov. 2001.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. End-to-end available bandwidth: measurement methodology, dynamics, and relation with TCP throughput

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      SIGCOMM '02: Proceedings of the 2002 conference on Applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications
      August 2002
      368 pages
      ISBN:158113570X
      DOI:10.1145/633025
      • cover image ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review
        ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review  Volume 32, Issue 4
        Proceedings of the 2002 SIGCOMM conference
        October 2002
        332 pages
        ISSN:0146-4833
        DOI:10.1145/964725
        Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2002 ACM

      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: 19 August 2002

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • Article

      Acceptance Rates

      SIGCOMM '02 Paper Acceptance Rate25of300submissions,8%Overall Acceptance Rate554of3,547submissions,16%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader