Congestion control is an indispensable component of transport protocols to prevent congestion collapse. As such, it distributes the available bandwidth among all competing flows, ideally in a fair manner. However, there exists a constantly evolving set of congestion control algorithms, each addressing different performance needs and providing the potential for custom parametrizations. In particular, content providers such as CDNs are known to tune TCP stacks for performance gains. In this paper, we thus empirically investigate if current Internet traffic generated by content providers still adheres to the conventional understanding of fairness. Our study compares fairness properties of testbed hosts to actual traffic of six major content providers subject to different bandwidths, RTTs, queue sizes, and queueing disciplines in a home-user setting. We find that some employed congestion control algorithms lead to significantly asymmetric bandwidth shares, however, AQMs such as FQ_CoDel are able to alleviate such unfairness.
For BBR, less research exists and the available studies partly disagree on the properties of BBR. This is especially true for intra-protocol fairness, as Cardwell al @cite_7 claim a high degree of fairness across the board, while Hock al @cite_4 identify scenarios where the fairness is significantly impaired. Regarding RTT-fairness, it is commonly found that BBR has a proportional RTT-fairness property, a flow with a larger RTT gets a larger share of the available bandwidth @cite_7 @cite_16 @cite_20 . Hock al @cite_4 generally confirm the findings but by investigating two different bottleneck queue sizes, they find that in scenarios with a smaller queue size (0.8 @math bandwidth delay product (BDP)) flows with a smaller RTT have a slight advantage, while in large buffer scenarios (8 @math BDP) the inverse is true and flows with larger RTTs have a significant advantage.
@cite_20 @cite_16 @cite_4 @cite_7
2745739520 2107575014 2032824989 1986442642
BBR is a new congestion-based congestion control algorithm proposed by Google. A BBR flow sequentially measures the bottleneck bandwidth and round-trip delay of the network pipe, and uses the measured results to govern its sending behavior, maximizing the delivery bandwidth while minimizing the delay. However, our deployment in geo-distributed cloud servers reveals a severe RTT fairness problem: a BBR flow with longer RTT dominates a competing flow with shorter RTT. Somewhat surprisingly, our deployment of BBR on the Internet and an in-house cluster unearthed a consistent bandwidth disparity among competing flows. Long BBR flows are bound to seize bandwidth from short ones. Intrigued by this unexpected behavior, we ask, is the phenomenon intrinsic to BBR? how's the severity? and what's the root cause? To this end, we conduct thorough measurements and develop a theoretical model on bandwidth dynamics. We find, as long as the competing flows are of different RTTs, bandwidth disparities will arise. With an RTT ratio of 10, even flow starvation can happen. We blame it on BBR's connivance at sending an excessive amount of data when probing bandwidth. Specifically, the amount of data is in proportion to RTT, making long RTT flows overwhelming short ones. Based on this observation, we design a derivative of BBR that achieves guaranteed flow fairness, at the meantime without losing any merits. We have implemented our proposed solution in Linux kernel and evaluated it through extensive experiments. We present experimental results evaluating fairness of several proposals to change the TCP congestion control algorithm, in support of operation on high bandwidth-delay- product (BDP) network paths. We examine and compare the fairness of New Reno TCP BIC, cubic, hamilton-TCP, highspeed-TCP and Scalable-TCP. We focus on four different views of fairness: TCP-friendliness RTT-fairness, intra- and inter-protocol fairness. This paper addresses the problem of fairness in wireless ad-hoc networks. Usually, the problem of fairness in wireless ad-hoc networks is addressed in a classic approach inherited from wired networks. The common assumption is that nodes flows have pre-assigned fair shares. The task becomes then to modify wired networks' fair queueing algorithms to address wireless network nature. Wired networks have efficient means of allocating fiar shares through admission control and additionally, the fair shares remain constant throughout the session duration due to the static nature of the nodes. In ad-hoc networks, it is meaningless to assume statically pre-assigned fair shares, since on one hand, not only the nodes move, but also the routers are mobile, and on the other hand, contention is location dependent, such that in terms of absolute guarantees, fairness would at most mean "avoiding starvation": thus applying rate proportional fiar queueing algorithms is beyond the original goal of such algorithm, viz. flow isolation protection and bandwidth guarantee. In this work we argue in favor of multi-level scheduling for wireless ad-hoc networks with max-min fair allocation of the fair shares at the lower-most layer (MAC layer). This paper, mainly lays down the theoretical framework by which one can calculate the fair shares that would achieve max-min fairness in an ad-hoc network. We design distributed algorithms that allow each node to determine its max-min per-link fair share in a global ad-hoc network without knowledge of the global topology of the network. The results are then used in conjunction with a novel practical scheduling algorithm for IEEE 802.11 to show how fairness is achieved Several high-speed TCP variants are adopted by end users and therefore, heterogeneous congestion control has become the characteristic of newly emerging high-speed optical networks. In contrast to homogeneous TCP flows, fairness among heterogeneous TCP flows now depends on router parameters such as queue management scheme and buffer size. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study of fairness performance among heterogeneous TCP variants over a 10 Gbps high-speed optical network environment. Our evaluation scenarios for heterogeneous TCP flows consist of TCP variants with substantial presence in current Internet; therefore, TCP-SACK, CUBIC TCP (CUBIC) and HighSpeed TCP (HSTCP) compete for bottleneck bandwidth. Experimental results for fairness are presented for different queue management schemes, such as Drop-tail, Random Early Detection (RED), CHOose and Keep for responsive flows CHOose and Kill for unresponsive flows (CHOKe), and Approximate Fair Dropping (AFD), with varying degree of buffer sizes. We observe heterogeneous TCP flows induce more unfairness than homogeneous ones. Active queue management (AQM) schemes, RED, CHOKe, and AFD, improve fairness for large buffer sizes as compared to Drop-tail, whereas AQM schemes lose the fairness advantage for small buffer sizes. This study provides preliminary results for fairness challenges to deploy all-optical routers with limited buffer size.