Vol. 23 No. 4 (2020) Cover Image
Vol. 23 No. 4 (2020)

Published: December 31, 2020

Pages: 352-356

Articles

An Improved Algorithm for Congestion Management in Network Based on Jitter and Time to Live Mechanisms

Samar Taha Yousif 1 Zaid Abass A. Al-Haboobi
1 Baghdad College of Economic Sciences University
History
  • Received: June 2, 2020
  • Revised: July 17, 2020
  • Accepted: September 25, 2020
  • Available Online: December 25, 2020
DOI

https://doi.org/10.29194/NJES.23040352

Abstract

As internet network developed rapidly in the past ten years, and its operating environment is constantly changing along with the development of computer and communication technology, the congestion problem has become more and more serious. Since TCP is the primary protocol for transport layers on the internet, the data transmitted via the transport protocol utilizes Vegas Transmission Control Protocol (TCP) as the congestion control algorithm, where it uses increasing in delay round trip time (RTT) as a signal of network congestion. However, this congestion control algorithm will attempt to fill network buffer, which causes an increase in (RTT) determined by Vegas, thereby reducing the congestion window, and making the transmission slower, Therefore Vegas has not been widely adopted on the Internet. In this paper, an improved algorithm called TCP Vegas-A is proposed consist of two parts: the first part is sending the congestion window used by the algorithm for congestion avoidance along with the TTL (Time To Live) mechanism that limits the lifetime of a packet in the network. While the second part of the algorithm is the priority-based packet sending strategy, and jitter is used as a congestion signal indication. The combination of the two is expected to improve the efficiency of congestion detection. A mathematical model is established, and the analysis of the model shows that the algorithm has better effects on controlling congestion and improving the network throughput, decreasing packet loss rate and increasing network utilization, the simulation is done using NS-2 network simulation platform environment and the results support the theoretical analysis.

Keywords

References

  1. C. Systematics, “effective practices for congestion m anagement : final report,” vol. 24, no. November, 2008.
  2. P. Akiene and L. Kabari, “Simulation of an Optimized Data Packet Transmission in a Congested Network,” Netw. Complex Syst., vol. 5, no. 8, pp. 29–37, 2015.
  3. Z. Wang, X. Zeng, X. Liu, L. Chen, and B. Guo, “TCP congestion control algorithm for heterogeneous networks,” Dianzi Yu Xinxi Xuebao/Journal Electron. Inf. Technol., vol. 38, no. 4, pp. 780–786, 2016, doi: 10.11999/JEIT150774.
  4. N. Ding, R. Q. Wu, and H. Jie, “TCP BRJ: Enhanced TCP congestion control based on bandwidth estimation and RTT jitter for heterogeneous networks,” Lect. Notes Electr. Eng., vol. 322, pp. 623–632, 2015, doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-08991-1_64.
  5. H. Dahmouni, A. Girard, and B. Sansò, “An analytical model for jitter in IP networks,” Ann. des Telecommun. Telecommun., vol. 67, no. 1–2, pp. 81–90, 2012, doi: 10.1007/s12243-011-0254-y.
  6. H. Dahmouni, A. Girard, M. Ouzineb, and B. Sansò, “The impact of jitter on traffic flow optimization in communication networks,” IEEE Trans. Netw. Serv. Manag., vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 279–292, 2012, doi: 10.1109/TNSM.2012.051712.110148.
  7. B. S. Yew, B. L. Ong, and R. B. Ahmad, “Performance evaluation of TCP vegas versus different TCP variants in homogeneous and heterogeneous wired networks,” World Acad. Sci. Eng. Technol., vol. 50, no. February, pp. 175–181, 2011.
  8. Y. Cao, M. Xu, and X. Fu, “Delay-based congestion control for multipath TCP,” Proc. - Int. Conf. Netw. Protoc. ICNP, no. January 2015, 2012, doi: 10.1109/ICNP.2012.6459978.
  9. B. A. A. Nunes, K. Veenstra, W. Ballenthin, S. Lukin, and K. Obraczka, “A machine learning framework for TCP round-trip time estimation,” Eurasip J. Wirel. Commun. Netw., vol. 2014, pp. 1–22, 2014, doi: 10.1186/1687-1499-2014-47.
  10. E. Altman, C. Barakat, E. Laborde, P. Brown, and D. Collange, “Fairness analysis of TCP/IP,” Proc. IEEE Conf. Decis. Control, vol. 1, no. May 2014, pp. 61–66, 2000, doi: 10.1109/CDC.2000.912733.
  11. A. Doma, J. Doma, M. Pagano, and T. Czach, “The Fluid Flow Approximation of the TCP Vegas and Reno Congestion Control Mechanism,” pp. 193–200, In: Czachórski T., Gelenbe E., Grochla K., Lent R. (eds) Computer and Information Sciences. ISCIS 2016. Communications in Computer and Information Science, vol 659. Springer, Cham. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-47217-1.
  12. T. Chowdhury and M. J. Alam, “Performance Evaluation of TCP Vegas over TCP Reno and TCP NewReno over TCP Reno,” JOIV Int. J. Informatics Vis., vol. 3, no. 3, 2019, doi: 10.30630/joiv.3.3.270.
  13. P. Chaudhary and S. Kumar, “A Review of Comparative Analysis of TCP Variants for Congestion Control in Network,” Int. J. Comput. Appl., vol. 160, no. 8, pp. 28–34, 2017, doi: 10.5120/ijca2017913087.
  14. G. Hasegawa and M. Murata, “Survey on fairness issues in TCP congestion control mechanisms,” IEICE Trans. Commun., vol. E84-B, no. 6, pp. 1461–1472, 2001.
  15. S. Floyd and K. Fall, “Promoting the use of end-to-end congestion control in the Internet,” IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw., vol. 7, no. 4, pp. 458–472, 1999, doi: 10.1109/90.793002.