Paper Review
: A Comparison of Mechanisms for Improving TCP Performance over Wireless
Links
Reviewer : Seh Leng Lim
This paper is an attempt to compare various feasible
mechanisms to improve TCP performance over wireless links.
The main contribution of the paper is its proposal that
a reliable link-layer protocol that is TCP-aware provides very good
performance, and that it is possible to achieve good performance without
splitting the end-to-end connection at the base station. It also recommends
that selective acknowledgements (such as SACK or SMART) and explicit loss
notifications (ELN) result in significant performance
improvements.
The key main ideas expounded are:
(a)
Hiding noncongestion related losses from TCP
(b) Making sender aware of the
existence of wireless hops so as to avoid invoking congestion control
algorithms when noncongestion related losses occur
(c) Coexisting of wireless-aware
transport protocol with link layer schemes
The authors classified the various schemes to
alleviate the effects of noncongestion-related losses
on TCP performance over wireless links as end-to-end proposals,
split-connection proposals, and link-layer proposals. The end-to-end protocols
either use selective acknowledgements or explicit loss notification. On the
other hand, split-connection hides the wireless link from the sender by
terminating the TCP connection at the base station. Link layer solutions
attempt to hide link-related losses from the TCP sender by using local
retransmissions and perhaps forward error correction.
Link layer protocols (such as LL in the case of the
paper) suffer from poor TCP performance because of competing retransmissions
caused by an incompatible setting of timers at the two layers (between link
layer and TCP) and unnecessary invocations of the TCP fast retransmission mechanism
due to out of order delivery of data. LL-TCP-aware protocol which makes use of
TCP semantics to prevent duplicate acknowledgements caused by wireless losses
to reach the sender and locally retransmits packets achieves better performance
than LL.
Using the original TCP
E2E-NEWRENO, E2E-ELN, E2E-SMART and E2E-IETF-SACK each
use new TCP options to identify and retransmit lost packets more accurately,
and recover from multiple losses in a single transmission window without timing
out. In fact, having both ELN and SACK will result in good performance.
For split connection protocols, SPLIT which uses TCP
Reno over the wireless connection, and SPLIT-SMART which uses SMART-based
selective acknowledgement scheme are used. Both perform worst than that of a
well-tuned, TCP-aware link layer protocol. This demonstrates that end-to-end
connection need not be split at the base station to achieve good performance.
I think that the paper has a significant
contribution (rating of 4) to the study of how to improve TCP performance in
the wireless networks. Through their experimental results, the authors conclude
that :
(a) a reliable link-layer
protocol with some knowledge of TCP results in very good performance
(b) it is possible to achieve
good performance without splitting the end-to-end connection at the base
station
(c) the use of selective
acknowledgements and explicit loss notifications result in significant
performance improvements
However, the experiments which make use of simulated
exponential bit-error rates as well as a test configuration of a sender and a
receiver may be a little simplistic. Therefore, it remains to be seen whether the
author’s conclusions still hold in a realistic setting of day-to-day use. As
the authors studied burst errors only in terms of burst length of 2, 4 and 6
packets, they also conceded that this was simplistic, and suggested that a temporal-loss
model based on average lengths of fades and other causes of wireless losses may be more
realistic. They also suggested studying the various protocols under various
network topologies.
Researchers and builders who build wireless applications
will have a better appreciations from this paper of the
difficulties faced in using TCP over wireless links.