skip to main content
research-article

Validating the Sharing Behavior and Latency Characteristics of the L4S Architecture

Published: 23 May 2020 Publication History
  • Get Citation Alerts
  • Abstract

    The strict low-latency requirements of applications such as virtual reality, online gaming, etc., can not be satisfied by the current Internet. This is due to the characteristics of classic TCP such as Reno and TCP Cubic which induce high queuing delays when used for capacity-seeking traffic, which in turn results in unpredictable latency. The Low Latency, Low Loss, Scalable throughput (L4S) architecture addresses this problem by combining scalable congestion controls such as DCTCP and TCP Prague with early congestion signaling from the network. It defines a Dual Queue Coupled (DQC) AQM that isolates low-latency traffic from the queuing delay of classic traffic while ensuring the safe co-existence of scalable and classic flows on the global Internet. In this paper, we benchmark the DualPI2 scheduler, a reference implementation of DQC AQM, to validate some of the experimental result(s) reported in the previous works that demonstrate the co-existence of scalable and classic congestion controls and its low-latency service. Our results validate the co-existence of scalable and classic flows using DualPI2 Single queue (SingleQ) AQM, and queue latency isolation of scalable flows using DualPI2 Dual queue (DualQ) AQM. However, the rate or window fairness between DCTCP without fair-queuing (FQ) pacing and TCP Cubic using DualPI2 DualQ AQM deviates from the original results. We attribute the difference in our results and the original results to the sensitivity of the L4S architecture to traffic bursts and the burst sending pattern of the Linux kernel.

    References

    [1]
    Olga Albisser, Koen De Schepper, Bob Briscoe, Olivier Tilmans, and Henrik Steen. 2019. DUALPI2 - Low Latency, Low Loss and Scalable (L4S) AQM. In Proc. Netdev 0x13.
    [2]
    Vaibhav Bajpai, Anna Brunstrom, Anja Feldmann, Wolfgang Kellerer, Aiko Pras, Henning Schulzrinne, Georgios Smaragdakis, Matthias Wählisch, and Klaus Wehrle. 2019. The Dagstuhl Beginners Guide to Reproducibility for Experimental Networking Research. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 49, 1 (2019), 24--30.
    [3]
    Stephen Bensley, Dave Thaler, Praveen Balasubramanian, Lars Eggert, and Glenn Judd. 2017. Data Center TCP (DCTCP): TCP Congestion Control for Data Centers. RFC 8257. (Oct. 2017).
    [4]
    Ethan Blanton, Dr. Vern Paxson, and Mark Allman. 2009. TCP Congestion Control. RFC 5681. (Sept. 2009).
    [5]
    Briscoe Bob, De Schepper Koen, Albisser Olga, Misund Joakim, Tilmans Olivier, Kuehlewind Mirja, Scheffenegger Richard, Bagnulo Marcelo, and Ahmed Asad. 2019. Implementing the 'TCP Prague' Requirements for L4S. In Proc. Netdev 0x13.
    [6]
    Bob Briscoe and Koen De Schepper. 2019. Scaling TCP's Congestion Window for Small Round Trip Times. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1904.07598.pdf accessed March 22, 2020.
    [7]
    Bob Briscoe, M Kuehelwind, and Richard Scheffenegger. 2019a. More Accurate ECN Feedback in TCP. Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tcpm-accurate-ecn-08, IETF (2019).
    [8]
    Bob Briscoe, Koen De Schepper, Marcelo Bagnulo, and Greg White. 2019b. Low Latency, Low Loss, Scalable Throughput (L4S) Internet Service: Architecture. Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tsvwg-l4s-arch-04. Work in Progress.
    [9]
    Koen De Schepper, Olga Albisser, Ing-Jyh Tsang, and Bob Briscoe. 2019 (accessed Jan 26, 2020). `Data Center to the Home': Ultra-Low Latency for All. Technical report. http://www.bobbriscoe.net/projects/latency/dctth_journal_draft20190726.pdf.
    [10]
    Koen De Schepper, Olga Bondarenko, Ing-Jyh Tsang, and Bob Briscoe. 2016. $PI^2$: A Linearized AQM for both Classic and Scalable TCP. In Proceedings of the 12th International on Conference on emerging Networking EXperiments and Technologies. ACM, 105--119.
    [11]
    A. Demers, S. Keshav, and S. Shenker. 1989. Analysis and Simulation of a Fair Queueing Algorithm. In Symposium Proceedings on Communications Architectures & Protocols.
    [12]
    Eric Dumazet. 2017. TCP: Internal Implementation for Pacing. https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/patch/762899/ accessed March 22, 2020.
    [13]
    Sangtae Ha, Injong Rhee, and Lisong Xu. 2008. CUBIC: A New TCP-friendly High-speed TCP Variant. ACM SIGOPS operating systems review (2008), 64--74.
    [14]
    Stephen Hemminger et al. 2005. Network Emulation with NetEm. In Linux Conf Au. 18--23.
    [15]
    Per Hurtig, Wolfgang John, and Anna Brunstrom. 2011. Recent Trends in TCP Packet-level Characteristics. Proc. ICNS (2011), 49--56.
    [16]
    Ingemar Johansson and Zaheduzzaman Sarker. 2017. Self-Clocked Rate Adaptation for Multimedia. RFC 8298. (Dec. 2017).
    [17]
    E. F. Kfoury, J. Crichigno, E. Bou-Harb, D. Khoury, and G. Srivastava. 2019. Enabling TCP Pacing using Programmable Data Plane Switches. In 2019 42nd International Conference on Telecommunications and Signal Processing (TSP).
    [18]
    Alberto Medina, Mark Allman, and Sally Floyd. 2005. Measuring the Evolution of Transport Protocols in the Internet. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 35, 2 (2005), 37--52.
    [19]
    Dejene Boru Oljira, Karl-Johan Grinnemo, Anna Brunstrom, and Javid Taheri. 2018. MDTCP: Towards a Practical Multipath Transport Protocol for Telco Cloud Datacenters. In 2018 9th International Conference on the Network of the Future (NOF). IEEE, 9--16.
    [20]
    Dejene Boru Oljira, Karl-Johan Grinnemo, Anna Brunstrom, and Javid Taheri. 2020. Guidelines and Scripts to Reproduce the Results in this Paper. (2020). https://git.cs.kau.se/oljideje/l4s-validation-artifacts.git.
    [21]
    Rong Pan, Preethi Natarajan, Chiara Piglione, Mythili Suryanarayana Prabhu, Vijay Subramanian, Fred Baker, and Bill VerSteeg. 2013. PIE: A Lightweight Control Scheme to Address the Bufferbloat Problem. In 2013 IEEE 14th International Conference on High Performance Switching and Routing (HPSR). IEEE, 148--155.
    [22]
    Damien Saucez and Luigi Iannone. 2018. Thoughts and Recommendations from the ACM SIGCOMM 2017 Reproducibility Workshop. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 48, 1 (2018), 70--74.
    [23]
    Quirin Scheitle, Matthias Wählisch, Oliver Gasser, Thomas C Schmidt, and Georg Carle. 2017. Towards an Ecosystem for Reproducible Research in Computer Networking. In Proceedings of the Reproducibility Workshop. 5--8.
    [24]
    Koen De Schepper and Bob Briscoe. 2019. Identifying Modified Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) Semantics for Ultra-Low Queuing Delay (L4S). Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tsvwg-ecn-l4s-id-07. Work in Progress.
    [25]
    Koen De Schepper, Bob Briscoe, and Greg White. 2019. DualQ Coupled AQMs for Low Latency, Low Loss and Scalable Throughput (L4S). Internet-Draft draft-ietf-tsvwg-aqm-dualq-coupled-10. Work in Progress.
    [26]
    Lisa Yan and Nick McKeown. 2017. Learning Networking by Reproducing Research Results. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 47, 2 (2017), 19--26.
    [27]
    M. Zhang, M. Dusi, W. John, and C. Chen. 2009. Analysis of UDP Traffic Usage on Internet Backbone Links. In 2009 Ninth Annual International Symposium on Applications and the Internet. 280--281.

    Cited By

    View all
    • (2024)A Fair Sharing Approach for Micro-Services Function Chains Placement in Ultra-Low Latency ServicesIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management10.1109/TNSM.2023.331364721:1(20-34)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2024
    • (2023)Reliable PPO-Based Concurrent Multipath Transfer for Time-Sensitive ApplicationsIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology10.1109/TVT.2023.327771272:10(13575-13590)Online publication date: Oct-2023
    • (2022)A Comprehensive Characterization of Threats Targeting Low-Latency Services: The Case of L4SJournal of Network and Systems Management10.1007/s10922-022-09706-z31:1Online publication date: 26-Dec-2022
    • Show More Cited By

    Index Terms

    1. Validating the Sharing Behavior and Latency Characteristics of the L4S Architecture

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review
      ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review  Volume 50, Issue 2
      April 2020
      64 pages
      ISSN:0146-4833
      DOI:10.1145/3402413
      Issue’s Table of Contents
      Permission to make digital or hard copies of part or all 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 third-party components of this work must be honored. For all other uses, contact the Owner/Author.

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      Published: 23 May 2020
      Published in SIGCOMM-CCR Volume 50, Issue 2

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. Congestion control
      2. ECN
      3. L4S
      4. Low-latency
      5. Reproducibility

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)114
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)8

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2024)A Fair Sharing Approach for Micro-Services Function Chains Placement in Ultra-Low Latency ServicesIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management10.1109/TNSM.2023.331364721:1(20-34)Online publication date: 1-Feb-2024
      • (2023)Reliable PPO-Based Concurrent Multipath Transfer for Time-Sensitive ApplicationsIEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology10.1109/TVT.2023.327771272:10(13575-13590)Online publication date: Oct-2023
      • (2022)A Comprehensive Characterization of Threats Targeting Low-Latency Services: The Case of L4SJournal of Network and Systems Management10.1007/s10922-022-09706-z31:1Online publication date: 26-Dec-2022
      • (2021)Assessing the Threats Targeting Low Latency Traffic: the Case of L4S2021 17th International Conference on Network and Service Management (CNSM)10.23919/CNSM52442.2021.9615534(544-550)Online publication date: 25-Oct-2021
      • (2021)Evaluating the L4S Architecture in Cellular Networks with a Programmable Switch2021 IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC)10.1109/ISCC53001.2021.9631539(1-6)Online publication date: 5-Sep-2021

      View Options

      Get Access

      Login options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media