Sizing router buffers

被引:333
作者
Appenzeller, G [1 ]
Keslassy, I [1 ]
McKeown, N [1 ]
机构
[1] Stanford Univ, Comp Syst Lab, Stanford, CA 94305 USA
关键词
Internet router; buffer size; bandwidth delay product; TCP;
D O I
10.1145/1030194.1015499
中图分类号
TP [自动化技术、计算机技术];
学科分类号
0812 [计算机科学与技术];
摘要
All Internet routers contain buffers to hold packets during times of congestion. Today, the size of the buffers is determined by the dynamics of TCP's congestion control algorithm. In particular, the goal is to make sure that when a link is congested, it is busy 100% of the time; which is equivalent to making sure its buffer never goes empty. A widely used rule-of-thumb states that each link needs a buffer of size B = <(RTT)over bar> x C, where <(RTT)over bar> is the average round-trip time of a flow passing across the link, and C is the data rate of the link. For example, a 10Gb/s router linecard needs approximately 250ms x 10Gb/s = 2.5Gbits of buffers; and the amount of buffering grows linearly with the line-rate. Such large buffers are challenging for router manufacturers, who must use large, slow, off-chip DRAMs. And queueing delays can be long, have high variance, and may destabilize the congestion control algorithms. In this paper we argue that the rule-of-thumb (B = (RTT) over bar x C) is now outdated and incorrect for backbone routers. This is because of the large number of flows (TCP connections) multiplexed together on a single backbone link. Using theory, simulation and experiments on a network of real routers, we show that a link with n flows requires no more than B = ((RTT) over bar x C)/rootn, for long-lived or short-lived TCP flows. The consequences on router design are enormous: A 2.5Gb/s link carrying 10,000 flows could reduce its buffers by 99% with negligible difference in throughput; and a 10Gb/s link carrying 50,000 flows requires only 10Mbits of buffering, which can easily be implemented using fast, on-chip SRAM.
引用
收藏
页码:281 / 292
页数:12
相关论文
共 28 条
[1]
[Anonymous], ACM SIGCOMM COMPUTER
[2]
[Anonymous], 1996, NOTES EFFECTIVE BAND
[3]
APPENZELLER G, 2004, TR04HPNG060800 STANF
[4]
AVRACHENKOV K, 2002, P LONIIS WORKSH TEL, P116
[5]
BUSH R, 2003, 3439 RFC
[6]
Cao J., 2001, INTERNET TRAFFIC TEN
[7]
DOVROLIS C, 2003, COMMUNICATION 0117
[8]
Feldmann A., 1998, Computer Communication Review, V28, P42, DOI 10.1145/285243.285256
[9]
FERGUSON D, 2003, COMMUNICATION 0121
[10]
Random Early Detection Gateways for Congestion Avoidance [J].
Floyd, Sally ;
Jacobson, Van .
IEEE-ACM TRANSACTIONS ON NETWORKING, 1993, 1 (04) :397-413