(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,Vol. 10, No. 1, January 2012
Analysis of DelAck based TCP-NewReno with varyingwindow size over Mobile Ad Hoc Networks
Parul Puri
1
Gaurav Kumar
2
Bhavna Tripathi
3
Department of Electronics & Communication Engineering
Jaypee Institute of Information Technology, Noida, India.
parulpuri9@gmail.com
1
er.gauravchachra@gmail.com
2
my.bhavna@gmail.com
3
Dr Gurjit Kaur
4
Assistant Professor, Department of Electronics & Communication Engineering
School of ICT,Gautam Buddha University,Greator Noida, India.gurjeet_kaur@rediffmail.com
4
Abstract
—
In this paper, we study TCP performance over multi-hop wireless networks that use IEEE 802.11 protocol for access.For such networks NewReno is the most deployed TCP variantthat handles multiple packet losses efficiently. It is shown thatthe delayed ACK scheme substantially increases the TCPthroughput. We propose an approach to improve theperformance of half-duplex and asymmetric multi hop networkswidely employed for mobile communication. Our approach isbased on optimizing the timer duration of the delayed ACKscheme and varying the window size. Simulations have beencarried on NS2 for TCP-NewReno variant using DSDV andAODV routing protocols.
Keywords: Multi-hop wireless networks, TCP, Newreno, DelAck, DSDV, AODV.
I.
I
NTRODUCTION
In the last few years, many research works have focusedon multi-hop wireless networks, in which relaying nodes arein general mobile, and communication needs are primarilybetween nodes within the same network. In such networks, anumber of intermediate nodes whose function is to relayinformation from one point to another point carry outcommunication between the two end nodes. The applicationcan be useful in various fields, especially because it useswireless means of communication, hence saving the hassle of laying down wires in already crowded or remote terrains.People working in collaboration and places in remotelocations can connect through it. Activities which requireworking at locations having no ground infrastructure, likepatrolling, disaster hit areas and rural areas, can be carried outusing this technology. Some important applications are alsobeing developed on the basis of this technology which can beused by armed forces in rescue and war time scenarios [1].Two key requirements of any network are reliable datatransfer and congestion control. The transmission controlprotocol (TCP) was designed to provide reliable end-to-enddelivery of data packet in the wired networks. However,unlike wired networks wireless networks suffer from manyproblems, such as packet losses due to congestion, nodemobility, high bit errors, medium access contention due tohidden terminals, and so on. Hence, in order to apply TCP in awireless environment, TCP needs some modifications.Further, keeping in mind the basic characteristic of a TCPscheme the acknowledgement (ACK) packets need to betransmitted from TCP sink to TCP source, against the flow of TCP data packets. This results in simultaneous arrival of TCPdata and ACK packets which can cause collisions and evenpacket losses [2, 3]. As a result, there is a huge degradation inthroughput in multi-hop networks [4].At the MAC level, each data packet transmission is a partof four-way handshake protocol, which is intended to reducethe collision probability. The handshake reduces theprobability of hidden-terminal collisions, but it does noteliminate them. This limits the number of packets that can betransmitted simultaneously in a wireless network withoutcollisions. The main factor affecting the TCP performance inmulti-hop wireless networks is the contention and collisionbetween ACK and data packets caused by taking the samepath. Thus, in order to improve the TCP throughput, we shalltry to decrease the ACK flows by using the delayed ACKscheme, where an ACK is transmitted for every d packets,defined by the DelAck number, that reach the destination [5].However, to avoid a deadlock, and if d packets do not arrive,an acknowledgement is generated after some time intervalwithout further waiting.The throughput of a network is limited by two windows:the congestion window and the receive window. The TCPsender uses a congestion window (cwnd) in regulating its
62http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,Vol. 10, No. 1, January 2012
transmission rate based on the feedback it gets from thenetwork [6]. Whereas, the receive window size sets a limit onthe amount of data that can be sent unacknowledged. Earlierresearches on TCP performance over multi-hop wirelessnetworks [3] have shown that for static chain topology it isbeneficial to limit the maximum receive window size of TCPsink to around n/4, where n is the number of nodes; and anyfurther increase in the maximum window size causes morecollisions and deterioration in the throughput. However, theissue of limit on an optimum window size for mobile topologyis left unaddressed.It is also seen, for a fixed small size of maximum windowsize, the delayed ACK does not outperform the standard TCPversion since most of the time, the window size limits thenumber of packets that can be transmitted by the sender to lessthan d. So, the delayed ACK scheme has to wait for the timerto expire before generating an ACK; and the sender cannottransmit packets during that time. Hence, the time intervalplays a critical part of TCP system with DelAck scheme.Tahiliani et al in [4] has studied the performance of TCPvariants such as Tahoe, Reno, NewReno, Sack, and Vegasover various routing protocol. They have analyzed that TCPNewReno and Sack perform better in comparison to the otherschemes. In this paper, the NewReno variant of TCP is testedas it is the most deployed one. We propose an approach toimprove the TCP performance by simulating the delayed ACKscheme with an optimum time interval and by varying thereceive window size for the same size of congestion window(cwnd) for mobile topology. We choose one proactive routingprotocols: Destination Sequenced Distance Vector (DSDV) aswell as one reactive routing protocols: Ad hoc On demandDistance Vector (AODV) for our study since they areaccepted as the standard routing protocols for multi-hopwireless networks [7].
II.
Related Work
In Reference [2], G. Holland et al uses a new metric called
expected throughput
to compare the performance bymeasuring the differences in throughput with varying numberof hops. Further the authors have studied the effects of
mobility on TCP Reno‟s performance in mobile ad hoc
networks. This metric will be used in our paper and will bediscussed in detail in Section V.Ammar Mohammed AI-Jubari [5] has shown that thedelayed acknowledgment strategy can improve TCPthroughput up to 233% compared to the regular TCP overmulti-hop wireless networks.Jiwei Chen [8] has tried to explain the effect of receivewindow size on the TCP throughput, but have restricted theresearch to static topology only.
III.
Delayed ACK Scheme
RFC 831 first suggested a delayed acknowledgement(DelACK) strategy, where a receiver doesn't alwaysimmediately acknowledge segments as it receives them. Thisrecommendation was carried forth and specified in more detailin RFC 1122 and RFC 5681 (formerly known as RFC 2581).RFC 5681 mandates that an acknowledgement be sent for atleast every other full-size segment, and that no more than500ms expire before any segment is acknowledged.Basically, the delayed acknowledgement procedure definestwo terms: DelAck number and Time interval. The DelAck number d defines the number of packets for which the receiverwaits before sending an acknowledgement. By using delayedacknowledgement mechanism the numbers of acknowledgments required are reduced. As acknowledgmentsare also parts of traffic, the load over channel decreases. Thus,using this concept the throughput is increased. But this is notalways the case; there are some situations where delayedacknowledgment leads to reduction in bandwidth. Studieshave shown d = 2 gives an optimum performance.Second parameter of the delayed acknowledgementprocedure is the Time Interval (Fig. 1). A timer is set by theTCP, depending on which DelAck procedure is modified.Now the acknowledgement is sent when the two packets arereceived or if the timer goes off, whichever occurs first.We aim to study the effect of the delayed acknowledgementprocedure on TCP throughput over multihop wireless links.Jiwei Chen et al [8] has studied that increasing the value of DelAck number does not always show a positive increase inthe throughput. In some situations it has proved to bedeteriorating also. This is so because if a large DelAck number is chosen it will cause a large burst of packets to passthereby increasing interference. Keeping in view this adverseaffect we have kept our DelAck number to be 2 and focus ourstudy on the Time interval aspect.
Figure 1.
Role of DelAck and Time Interval in TCP communicattion
IV.
Window Size
In order to limit the impact of congestion, TCP uses aspecial kind of buffer called Sliding (Receive) Window.Receive window size indicates the buffer size of the receiver.In other words, window size is the maximum number of packets (bytes) a source can transmit before receiving anacknowledgement from the receiver. By controlling thewindow size, a receiver can control the rate at which otherhosts send data to it. For the small window size, the number of packets transmitted to the receiver is less. But the number of acknowledgements transmitted in this case will becomparatively larger and will cause collision with datapackets, thus reducing the throughput. On the other hand, if the window size is too large, number of acknowledgementsdecrease. However, as the receiver buffer size is more, numberof packets transmitted by the sender host increases therebycausing bursty traffic. This causes interference and packetlosses depending upon the path length. Thus, there exists an
63http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500
(IJCSIS) International Journal of Computer Science and Information Security,Vol. 10, No. 1, January 2012
optimum window size for which the channel gives maximumthroughput. We aim to find the size of this optimum size of the Sliding window.
V.
Simulation Setup and Methodology
Simulations have been done on ns-2 [9], a discrete eventsimulator. The simulations were carried for multihop wirelessstatic and mobile topologies.
A.
Multihop Wireless Static Topologies
A linear string topology of 8 nodes was designed, similarto the one used in [10]. A single TCP connection with variablenumber of hops (1-7) was studied. The nodes were configuredto use 802.11 MAC protocol with the following parameters.Distance between two nodes was 250 metres. This distance issame as the maximum transmission range. Radio propagationmodel used was Two-ray ground reflection model. Thechannel data rate was 2 Mbps, TCP packet size was 1460bytes and the maximum window size was 32. With the abovementioned parameters fixed and varying the TCP protocol,routing protocol and TCP sink results were taken. The resultshave been discussed in Section VI.
B.
Multihop Wireless Mobile Topologies
Our network model constitutes of 25 nodes in a 1500 x400 m2 flat, rectangular area. Movement of nodes wasaccording to the mobility patterns generated by the mobilitypattern generator offered by ns-2; which is based on randomwaypoint mobility model. In this model, each node picks arandom destination. Once it arrives to the destination it pausesfor some time and then picks another destination. Thisprocedure is followed throughout. The mean speed of thenodes was taken 10m/s and the pause time was 0 sec. Thesimulation results are based on an average throughput of 25mobility patterns. The parameters were same as those takenfor static topologies. Here, the TCP-NewReno variant wasstudied with variations in TCP sink, routing protocol andwindow size. Simulation results are discussed in the SectionVI.
C.
Performance Metric
Throughput has been used as the performance metric.Throughput was measured for fixed sender and receiver nodesover the entire period of the connection. TCP cannotdetermine the cause of packet loss, and considers congestionthe reason behind the losses. Thus, the throughput so obtainedis always less than the optimal value. In order to compare thedifference, we use another metric called the
expected throughput
.
Expected throughput
gives an upper bound on theTCP throughput.
Expected throughput
is calculated using thethroughput values obtained in the static topologies. If t
i
= time,T
i
= throughput, where i = hops (ranges from 1 to 7). Hence t1means "amount of time source and destination were 1 hop farfrom each other". Similar explanation comes for throughput.T
2
means "throughput when source and destination were 2hops far from each other". The values of T
i
are those obtainedfrom simulating static topologies and t
i
is obtained from thescene file. So, we calculate the
expected throughput
using (1)as follows:
iii1ii1
tTExpectedthroughputt
(1)Practical Throughput is obtained from the simulations. Both
expected
and practical throughputs are then compared in termsof the percentage achieved of the
expected throughput
calculated as follows:
Practical ThroughputPercentage Achieved = %Expected Throughput
(2)
VI.
R
ESULTS AND
A
NALYSIS
A.
Multihop Wireless Static Topologies
Tables I and II show the throughput (in Kbps) obtained foreach variant of TCP with DSDV and AODV routing protocolsrespectively. These results will be used for calculating the
expected
throughput
values as explained in Section V.Our studies show that NewReno variant of TCP gives themost optimum performance as compared to other variants forboth the routing protocols. This is because of the fact thatNewReno is more capable in handling multiple packet lossesfrom a single window of data as compared to other TCPvariants. Hence, for mobile topologies we carry out ouranalysis for the NewReno TCP scheme.As is known, the performance of TCP depends on therouting protocols as every routing protocol has a differenttechnique to handle link failures and to form routes. From ourresults, it can be seen in static topologies performance of proactive routing protocol (DSDV) is better in terms of throughput as compared to reactive routing protocol (AODV).The reason is that proactive protocols maintain a routing table.However, in reactive protocols route calculation is on-demandbasis which causes some delay in sending data. Also, DSDVhas lesser number of control packets which decreases thenumber of collisions.Further, an improvement in throughput is observed whenDelAck is used for all TCP variants over DSDV and AODVrouting protocols.
B.
Multihop Wireless Mobile Topologies
Tables III and IV show the throughput (in Kbps) obtainedfor the NewReno variant of TCP with DSDV and AODVrouting protocols respectively. Throughput values have beenobtained by varying the characteristics of TCP sink such aswindow size and delay interval.Based on the simulation results Fig. 2 to Fig. 7 have beenplotted and will be further analyzed.
64http://sites.google.com/site/ijcsis/ISSN 1947-5500
Search History:
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
p.
11 Paper 30121110 IJCSIS Camera Ready Paper Pp. 62-67
146
Reads
0
Readcasts
2
Embed Views
Recommended
More From This User
Notes
Load more
