Date post: | 18-Dec-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | arleen-reynolds |
View: | 214 times |
Download: | 1 times |
The Effect of First-Hop Wireless Bandwidth Allocation on End-to-End Network Performance
Lili Qiu, Paramvir Bahl, Atul AdyaMicrosoft Research
NOSSDAV’2002Miami Beach, Florida
2
Outline
• Motivate the problem• First hop wireless bandwidth
reservation schemes• Performance evaluation• Related work• Conclusion
3
Introduction
• IP telephony is becoming popular• With the growth of wireless technologies, an
IP-based portable phone is a compelling device for voice communication
IEEE 802.11
Internet
Wireless Access Point
AP
IEEE 802.11
AP
PDA PDAPDA PDAPDA
Wireless Access Point
PDA
Kyocera QCP 6035(CDMA) - Palm 3.5 OS
Nokia 9110 (GSM) - GEOS OS
MS SmartPhone - WinCE 3.0 OS
AudioVox Thera (CDMA2000) - PPC 2002 OS
Samsung I300 - Palm OS
Siemens SX 45 (GPRS) - PPC 2002 OS
Handspring Treo 180 - Palm OS (GSM)
MSR’s UCoM (802.11) - PPC 2002
49 million PDA-Phones by the year 2007 [Cellular News 1/23/02]
PIP
5
Research Issues
• Design space– Power– Security– Mobility– Bandwidth this paper’s focus– …
• Wireless bandwidth management– Wireless technologies used in the first hop are still slow– Challenges
• End-to-end reservation is preferred for ensuring QoS• Little QoS support in the Internet reservation only at
wireless hops• Effectiveness of local reservation depends on location of
bottleneck
6
Motivation:Throughput of Internet Paths
• How often is a wireless application traversing the Internet rated-limited by its Internet path rather than wireless hop?
• Analyze the Internet tcpdump traces collected at microsoft.com– Incoming & outgoing web traffic, software download
traffic, streaming media traffic
Date Time # pkts # clients
Dec. 20, 2000
6:53PM–9:01PM 100 million 134,475
Jan. 24, 2001 10:08AM -11:21AM 20.4 million 53,811
7
Throughput of Internet Paths
0
20
40
60
80
100
1 10 100 1000 10000
Average throughput (Kbps)
Per
cen
tag
e o
f h
ost
s
Dec. 20, 2000 Jan. 24, 2001
• Different clients experience widely different throughput, from 1 Kbps to 10 Mbps • Over 30% clients have throughput less than 20 Kbps Internet path can become bottleneck • Useful to consider congestion level of the Internet when making the bandwidth allocation decision in the first hop
8
Temporal Stability of Internet Throughput
0
20
40
60
80
100
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Max/Mean Throughput Ratio
Per
cen
tag
e o
f h
ost
s
Dec. 20, 2000 Jan. 24, 2001
Over 90% of the hosts have throughput variation within a factor of 2 Internet throughput is stable
9
Our Approach
• Observation– Not efficient to reserve more bandwidth than what an
application would use.– An application may use less BW
• either because it generates data at slower rate • or because bottleneck is at other links (e.g. Internet).
• Approach– Passively monitor applications’ bandwidth – Adaptively modify allocated wireless bandwidth
according to usage
• Places to deploy the technique– Infrastructure (Access point/Access server)– Client (PDA)
10
First-hop Wireless Bandwidth Reservation Schemes
1. No reservation: best effort2. R0: Reserve s3. R1: Reserve min(s, f*I)4. R2: Same as R1, except it periodically re-
adjusts allocations: the rate specified by the sourceI: Internet bandwidthf: tolerance factor to account for estimation error
11
Performance Evaluation
• Simulations in ns-2• Senders use TFRC
[FHP00]• Compare the above four
reservation schemes• Three scenarios
– Congestion at wireless hop
– Congestion at the Internet path
– Congestion at both places
A B
Senders Receivers
6Mbps
Internet pathwireless hop
12
Scenario 1: Congestion in the wireless hop
0
0.01
0.02
0.03
0.04
0.05
0.06
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
# incoming connections
Ave
rag
e b
and
wid
th
per
flo
w (
Mb
ps)
No Reservation Reservation with R0
Reservation with R1 Reservation with R2
First hop reservation maintains QoS when congestionoccurs in the first hop.
Simulation scenario:S = 48 KbpsI = 96 Kbpss: the rate specified by the sourceI: Internet bandwidthCongestion in the wireless hop
13
Scenario 2: Congestion in the Internet path
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
# incoming connections
# ad
mit
ted
flo
ws
No reservation Reservation with R0
Reservation with R1 Reservation with R2
• R0 is wasteful.• First hop reservation is ineffective when congestion occurs in the Internet.
0
0.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
0.03
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
# incoming connections
Ave
rag
e b
and
wid
th p
er
flo
w (
Mb
ps)
No reservation Reservation with R0
Reservation with R1 Reservation with R2
Simulation scenario: S = 48 Kbps, I = 24 Kbps congestion in the Internet
14
Scenario 3: Congestion at both Internet and wireless hop
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
# incoming connections
# ad
mit
ted
flo
ws
No reservation Reservation with R0
Reservation with R1 Reservation with R2
00.0050.01
0.0150.02
0.0250.03
0.0350.04
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
# incoming connectionsA
vera
ge
ban
dw
idth
per
fl
ow
(M
bp
s)No reservation Reservation with R0
Reservation with R1 Reservation with R2
Reservation based on Internet throughput performs the best.
S = 48 Kbps, I = 24 or 96 Kbps congestion at both places
15
Scenario 3: Congestion at both Internet and wireless hop (Cont.)
• Use the throughput in the Internet trace for our simulation– Pick hosts from the Dec. 2000 throughput trace, and
assign their perceived throughput to the bandwidth of the Internet path
– Vary the bandwidth of the links according to the trace
• Estimate throughput using past measurements• Tolerance factor (f) = 1.5 • Desired sending rate of a source
– Either CBR: 16 Kbps, 24 Kbps, 32 Kbps, 48 Kbps– Or VBR: the rate of video traces we collected
• Poisson arrival & departure – mean duration = 8 minutes
16
Scenario 3: Congestion at both Internet and wireless hop (Cont.)
Allocating bandwidth that adapts to the Internet path’s throughput is even better.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2
Normalized quality
Perc
enta
ge o
f con
nect
ions
No reservation R0 R1 R2
0
100
200
300
400
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
Time
# ad
mitt
ed c
onne
ctio
ns
No reservation R0 R1 R2
17
System ComponentsAllocation Server• monitors throughput and
re-adjusts reservation periodically
Access Server• Polices users
Option Allocation Access Pro
1 Client Client Easier to deploy
2 AP AP No need for client cooperation
3 Gateway Gateway
18
Related Work
• Studies on Internet path properties– Internet throughput remains stable on the
time scales of minutes [BSSK97, ZDPS01]
• Admission controls– RSVP [ZDES+93]– Measurement-based admission control – Endpoint admission control [BKSS+00]
• Wireless QoS– IEEE 802.11e – Subnet bandwidth manager [RFC 2814]
19
Conclusions
• Provide applications with better QoS without infrastructure support in the Internet
• Study several bandwidth allocation techniques for wireless hops
• Adaptive bandwidth allocation for first-hop wireless based on passive observation of Internet paths performs the best– Has better quality than no reservation – Admits more flows than naïve reservation
• Design choices• Applications
– Wireless real time applications