Bob Briscoe
Abstract
Resource allocation and accountability keep reappearing on every list of requirements for the Internet architecture. The reason we never resolve these issues is a broken idea of what the problem is. The applied research and standards communities are using completely unrealistic and impractical fairness criteria. The resulting mechanisms don't even allocate the right thing and they don't allocate it between the right entities. We explain as bluntly as we can that thinking about fairness mechanisms like TCP in terms of sharing out flow rates has no intellectual heritage from any concept of fairness in philosophy or social science, or indeed real life. Comparing flow rates should never again be used for claims of fairness in production networks. Instead, we should judge fairness mechanisms on how they share out the 'cost' of each user's actions on others
- M. Allman, V. Paxson, and W. Stevens. TCP congestion control. Request for comments 2581, IETF, Apr. 1999. Google Scholar
Digital Library
- R. Braden, D. Clark, S. Shenker, and J. Wroclawski. Developing a next-generation Internet architecture. White paper, DARPA, July 2000.Google Scholar
- B. Briscoe, A. Jacquet, C. Di Cairano-Gilfedder, A. Salvatori, A. Soppera, and M. Koyabe. Policing congestion response in an internetwork using re-feedback. Proc. ACM SIGCOMM'05, CCR, 35(4):277--288, Aug. 2005. Google ScholarDigital Library
- B. Briscoe, A. Jacquet, A. Salvatori, and M. Koyabe. Re-ECN: Adding accountability for causing congestion to TCP/IP. Internet Draft draft-briscoe-tsvwg-re-ecn-tcp-03.txt, IETF, Oct. 2006. (Work in progress).Google Scholar
- P. Chhabra, S. Chuig, A. Goel, A. John, A. Kumar, H. Saran, and R. Shorey. XCHOKe: Malicious source control for congestion avoidance at Internet gateways. In Proc. IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP'02). IEEE, Nov. 2002. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D. Clark, K. Sollins, J. Wroclawski, and R. Braden. Tussle in cyberspace: Defining tomorrow's Internet. Proc. ACM SIGCOMM'02, CCR, 32(4):347--356, Oct. 2002. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Crowcroft and P. Oechslin. Differentiated end to end Internet services using a weighted proportional fair sharing TCP. CCR, 28(3):53--69, July 1998. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. Demers, S. Keshav, and S. Shenker. Analysis and simulation of a fair-queueing algorithm. CCR (SIGCOMM'89), 19(4):1--12, Sept. 1989. Google ScholarDigital Library
- M. Feldman, C. Papadimitriou, J. Chuang, and I. Stoica. FreeRiding and whitewashing in peer-to-peer systems. In Proc. Workshop on Practice and Theory of Incentives in Networked Systems (PINS'04), pages 228--236. ACM SIGCOMM, 2004. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Floyd and K. Fall. Promoting the use of end-to-end congestion control in the Internet. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 7(4):458--472, Aug. 1999. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Floyd, M. Handley, J. Padhye, and J. Widmer. TCP friendly rate control (TFRC): Protocol specification. Request for comments rfc3448.txt, IETF, Jan. 2003. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Floyd and V. Jacobson. Random early detection gateways for congestion avoidance. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 1(4):397--413, Aug. 1993. Google ScholarDigital Library
- E. Friedman and P. Resnick. The social cost of cheap pseudonyms. Journal of Economics and Management Strategy, 10(2):173--199, 1998.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Y. Ganjali and N. McKeown. Update on buffer sizing in Internet routers. CCR, 36, Oct. 2006. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. J. Gibbens and F. P. Kelly. Distributed connection acceptance control for a connectionless network. In Proc. International Teletraffic Congress (ITC16), Edinburgh, pages 941--952, 1999.Google Scholar
- R. J. Gibbens and F. P. Kelly. Resource pricing and the evolution of congestion control. Automatica, 35(12):1969--1985, Dec. 1999. Google ScholarDigital Library
- V. Jacobson. Congestion avoidance and control. Proc. ACM SIGCOMM'88 Symposium, CCR, 18(4):314--329, Aug. 1988. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Jaffe. A decentralized, "optimal", multiple-user, flow control algorithm. In Proc. Fifth Int'l. Conf. On Computer Communications, pages 839--844, Oct. 1980.Google Scholar
- D. Katabi, M. Handley, and C. Rohrs. Congestion control for high bandwidth-delay product networks. Proc. ACM SIGCOMM'02, CCR, 32(4):89--102, Oct. 2002. Google ScholarDigital Library
- F. P. Kelly. Charging and rate control for elastic traffic. European Transactions on Telecommunications, 8:33--37, 1997. (Correction by R. Johari & F. Kelly at URL: http://www.statslab.cam.ac.uk/~frank/elastic.html).Google ScholarCross Ref
- F. P. Kelly. Models for a self-managed Internet. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, 358(1773):2335--2348, Aug. 2000.Google ScholarCross Ref
- F. P. Kelly, A. K. Maulloo, and D. K. H. Tan. Rate control for communication networks: shadow prices, proportional fairness and stability. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 49(3):237--252, 1998.Google ScholarCross Ref
- P. Key and L. Massoulié. User policies in a network implementing congestion pricing. In Proc. Workshop on Internet Service Quality and Economics. MIT, Dec. 1999.Google Scholar
- P. Key, L. Massoulie, A. Bain, and F. Kelly. Fair Internet traffic integration: network flow models and analysis. Annales des Télécommunications, 59:1338--1352, 2004.Google Scholar
- J. K. MacKie-Mason and H. Varian. Pricing congestible network resources. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, "Advances in the Fundamentals of Networking", 13(7):1141--1149, 1995. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Mazumdar, L. G. Mason, and C. Douligeris. Fairness in network optimal flow control: Optimality of product forms. IEEE Trans. on Comms, 39(5):775--782, May 1991.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Nagle. On packet switches with infinite storage. Request for comments 970, IETF, Dec. 1985. (Status: unknown).Google Scholar
- A. Odlyzko. A modest proposal for preventing Internet congestion. Technical report TR 97.35.1, AT&T Research, Sept. 1997. Google ScholarDigital Library
- R. Pan, L. Breslau, B. Prabhaker, and S. Shenker. Approximate fairness through differential dropping. CCR, 33(2):23--40, Apr. 2003. Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. K. Ramakrishnan, S. Floyd, and D. Black. The addition of explicit congestion notification (ECN) to IP. Request for comments 3168, IETF, Sept. 2001. Google ScholarDigital Library
- J. Rawls. Justice as Fairness: A Restatement. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA, 2001.Google Scholar
- J. R. Saul. The Collapse of Globalism and the Reinvention of the World. Viking, Canada, 2005.Google Scholar
- S. Shenker. Fundamental design issues for the future Internet. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 13(7):1176--1188, 1995. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Siderenko. Characteristics of Perceptions of Social Justice in the Contemporary USSR, chapter 3, pages 41--45. Centre for Social Anthropology and Computing, University of Kent, 1991.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Flow rate fairness: dismantling a religion
Recommendations
Fairness Guaranteed Cooperative Resource Allocation in Femtocell Networks
User-deployed low-power femtocell access points (FAPs) can provide better indoor coverage and higher data rates than conventional cellular networks. However, a major problem in this uncoordinated frequency reuse scenario is the inter-cell interference. ...
Improving Quality of Service and Assuring Fairness in WLAN Access Networks
As public deployment of wireless local area networks (WLANs) has increased and various applications with different service requirements have emerged, fairness and quality of service (QoS) are two imperative issues in allocating wireless channels. This ...
Airtime Fairness for IEEE 802.11 Multirate Networks
Under a multi rate network scenario, the IEEE 802.11 DCF MAC fails to provide air-time fairness for all competing stations since the protocol is designed for ensuring max-min throughput fairness and the maximum achievable throughput by any station gets ...
Comments