Adaptive flow control via Interest Aggregation in CCN

by

Dojun Byun, Byoung-joon, Myeong-Wuk JangSamsung Electronics, Advanced Institute of Technology

IEEE ICC2013-Next-Generation Networking Symposium

TUN Tun Oo, Nakazato Lab

GITS, Waseda University

16-1-2014

Adaptive flow control via Interest Aggregation in CCN 2

Outline

• Introduction to CCND processing• CCNx Pipeline-based flow control• A problem with current mechanism• Purposed protocol extension• Experiment results• Conclusion

1/16/2014

3

Interest and Data Message Processing flow in CCND

Content Store PIT FIB

1

2a

4

56

2b

3a

3b

InterestData

1. Interest arrives at an CCN node

2. Check CS,if Data exit, it responds to the Interest messageelse, check its PIT

3. If there is a similar Interest, suppress the newly Interestelse, checks its FIB

4. When it found longest prefix matching in FIB, the Interest is finally forwarded to next hop

5. When Data arrives at the CCND, check PIT to obtain the requested Interest entry

6. If one entry is found, send the Data message back

1/16/2014 Adaptive flow control via Interest Aggregation in CCN

pipeline-based flow control

• one-to-one Interest/Data Exchange• Pipelining Interest message to improve under-utilization

RTT

sizesegment Throughput

RTT

sizesegment size pipelineThroughput

1/16/2014 4Adaptive flow control via Interest Aggregation in CCN

5

Congested uplink in asymmetric link

• In the asymmetric link such as cellular network– Uplink usage will become heavier in social network– Uplink are probable to be congested

• Congested uplink cause the slower request rate– Result in under-utilization of Data transmission link

1/16/2014 Adaptive flow control via Interest Aggregation in CCN

Adaptive flow control via Interest Aggregation in CCN 6

Proposed enhancement solution

– Objective: To deliver multiple Data message requests with only one Interest message

– Proposal• Embedding range of segments being requested in the Interest

packet header• Modifying CCND to check its cache using range field• Populating PIT entries with segments range that are not in

cache• Forwarding Interest that are not in the cache and not forwarded

yet• Content sender responds as specified by the range field

1/16/2014

Adaptive flow control via Interest Aggregation in CCN 7

Interest Header Extension

• Single range field– Range is specified by start segment and end segment

• Multiple range field• Multiple range field are used to request selectively

Single rangeMultiple Range

1/16/2014

Adaptive flow control via Interest Aggregation in CCN 8

Extension of CCND processing

1/16/2014

•Self-generate Interest message as the range

•Content Store processing and PIT processing are same as original CCND

•Interest with range is forwarded to FIB but not to Internally generated Interest

•Satisfied Interest are excluded from the range•For resulting discontinuous range, multiple ranges can be used

Adaptive flow control via Interest Aggregation in CCN 9

Flow Control Scheme

• Delayed Interest Count (N):– Subsequent Interest messages are sent only after a

certain number of Data messages N received

• N can be set adaptively accordingly to the network congestion status

• Current paper N is set to– Subsequent Interest will be transmitted after N Data is

received– Max window size

• Maximum number of segment the range field can specify

4

size windowmax

1/16/2014

Adaptive flow control via Interest Aggregation in CCN 10

An Example for

4

size windowmax N

Interest Seg(1~10)

Data (1)

Data (3)

Data (4)

Data (5)

Data (6)

Data (7)

Data (8)

Data (9)

Data (10)

Data (11)

Data (12)

Data (13)

Data (2)

Interest Seg=11~13

Interest Seg=14~16

Interest Seg=17~19

Interest Seg=20~23

Node 1 Node 3

Max window size =10

1/16/2014

Experimental Test-bed Configuration

1/16/2014

11

Adaptive flow control via Interest Aggregation in CCN 11

Experimental results• Inefficient use of uplink

negatively affect the downlink throughput

• Decreased uplink bandwidth triggers congestion in the uplink and causing delayed Data delivery

Fig. Pipeline-based vs. proposed flow control in download speed Fig. Performance improvement ratio in

throughput over pipeline-based flow control

1/16/2014 Adaptive flow control via Interest Aggregation in CCN 12

Adaptive flow control via Interest Aggregation in CCN 13

Experimental result

• No. of Interest messages transmitted to receive a 10 MB file

Fig. Pipeline-based vs. proposed flow control in bandwidth usage efficiency

1/16/2014

Adaptive flow control via Interest Aggregation in CCN 14

Conclusion

• Authors proposed a solution for a problem of down link under-utilization while uplink is severely congested

• Extension of Interest header and experiment were implemented in CCNx

• Adaptive optimization for controlling the number of Interest per window is left for further study

1/16/2014

Thanks you!