Chapter 3 v8.0
Chapter 3 v8.0
Transport Layer
A note on the use of these PowerPoint slides:
We’re making these slides freely available to all (faculty, students,
readers). They’re in PowerPoint form so you see the animations; and
can add, modify, and delete slides (including this one) and slide content
to suit your needs. They obviously represent a lot of work on our part.
In return for use, we only ask the following:
If you use these slides (e.g., in a class) that you mention their
source (after all, we’d like people to use our book!)
If you post any slides on a www site, that you note that they are
adapted from (or perhaps identical to) our slides, and note our
copyright of this material.
Computer Networking: A
For a revision history, see the slide note for this page.
Top-Down Approach
Thanks and enjoy! JFK/KWR 8th edition
All material copyright 1996-2020
Jim Kurose, Keith Ross
J.F Kurose and K.W. Ross, All Rights Reserved Pearson, 2020
Transport Layer: 3-1
Transport layer: overview
Our goal:
understand principles learn about Internet transport
behind transport layer layer protocols:
services: • UDP: connectionless transport
• multiplexing, • TCP: connection-oriented reliable
demultiplexing transport
• reliable data transfer • TCP congestion control
• flow control
• congestion control
Sender:
application is passed an application- application
app. msg
layer message
transport determines segment TThhtransport
app. msg
header fields values
network (IP) creates segment network (IP)
physical physical
Receiver:
application receives segment from IP application
checks header values
app. msg
transport extracts application-layer transport
message
network (IP) network (IP)
demultiplexes message up
link to application via socket link
physical physical
Th app. msg
enterprise
• bandwidth guarantees network
transport
Hn Ht HTTP msg
transport
application
application application
transport transport
(UDP) (UDP)
link link
physical physical
physical physical
data to/from
UDP segment format application layer
Transmitted: 5 6 11
Received: 4 6 11
receiver-computed sender-computed
checksum
= checksum (as received)
sum 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0
checksum 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1
Note: when adding numbers, a carryout from the most significant bit needs to be
added to the result
* Check out the online interactive exercises for more examples: http://gaia.cs.umass.edu/kurose_ross/interactive/
Transport Layer: 3-33
Internet checksum: weak protection!
example: add two 16-bit integers
0 1
1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0
1 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1
wraparound 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 Even though
numbers have
sum 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 changed (bit
flips), no change
checksum 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 in checksum!
sending receiving
process process
application data data
transport
reliable channel
transport
network
unreliable channel
sending receiving
process process
application data data
transport
sender-side of receiver-side
Complexity of reliable data reliable data
transfer protocol
of reliable data
transfer protocol
transfer protocol will depend
(strongly) on characteristics of transport
network
unreliable channel (lose, unreliable channel
corrupt, reorder data?)
reliable service implementation
sending receiving
process process
application data data
transport
sender-side of receiver-side
reliable data of reliable data
Sender, receiver do not know transfer protocol transfer protocol
the “state” of each other, e.g.,
was a message received? transport
network
unless communicated via a unreliable channel
message
reliable service implementation
unreliable channel
udt_send(): called by rdt rdt_rcv(): called when packet
to transfer packet over Bi-directional communication over arrives on receiver side of
unreliable channel to receiver unreliable channel channel
Transport Layer: 3-41
Reliable data transfer: getting started
We will:
incrementally develop sender, receiver sides of reliable data transfer
protocol (rdt)
consider only unidirectional data transfer
• but control info will flow in both directions!
use finite state machines (FSM) to specify sender, receiver
event causing state transition
actions taken on state transition
state: when in this “state”
next state uniquely state state
determined by next 1 event
event 2
actions
extract(rcvpkt,data)
deliver_data(data)
sndpkt = make_pkt(ACK, chksum)
udt_send(sndpkt)
rdt_send(data)
sndpkt = make_pkt(1, data, checksum)
udt_send(sndpkt)
start_timer
L/R L/R
Usender=
RTT + L / R
.008 RTT
=
30.008
= 0.00027
U 3L / R .0024
sender = = = 0.00081
RTT + L / R 30.008
rcv_base
Not received
Transport Layer: 3-68
Go-Back-N in action
sender window (N=4) sender receiver
012345678 send pkt0
012345678 send pkt1
send pkt2 receive pkt0, send ack0
012345678
012345678 send pkt3 Xloss receive pkt1, send ack1
(wait)
receive pkt3, discard,
012345678 rcv ack0, send pkt4 (re)send ack1
012345678 rcv ack1, send pkt5 receive pkt4, discard,
(re)send ack1
ignore duplicate ACK receive pkt5, discard,
(re)send ack1
pkt 2 timeout
012345678 send pkt2
012345678 send pkt3
012345678 send pkt4 rcv pkt2, deliver, send ack2
012345678 send pkt5 rcv pkt3, deliver, send ack3
rcv pkt4, deliver, send ack4
rcv pkt5, deliver, send ack5
pkt0
(after receipt)
a dilemma!
0123012
0123012 pkt1 0123012
0123012 pkt2 0123012
0123012
example: 0123012 pkt3
X
0123012
seq #s: 0, 1, 2, 3 (base 4 counting) pkt0 will accept packet
with seq number 0
window size=3 (a) no problem
0123012 pkt0
0123012 pkt1 0123012
0123012 pkt2 X 0123012
X 0123012
X
timeout
retransmit pkt0
0123012 pkt0
will accept packet
with seq number 0
(b) oops!
Transport Layer: 3-74
sender window receiver window
Selective repeat: (after receipt)
pkt0
(after receipt)
a dilemma!
0123012
0123012 pkt1 0123012
0123012 pkt2 0123012
0123012
example: 0123012 pkt3
X
0123012
seq #s: 0, 1, 2, 3 (base 4 counting) receiver can’t
pkt0 will accept packet
see sender side with seq number 0
window size=3 (a) no problem
receiver
behavior
identical in both
cases!
0something’s
123012 pkt0
Q: what relationship is needed 0(very)
1 2 3 0 1wrong!
2 pkt1 0123012
window size
Acknowledgements: N
User types‘C’
Seq=42, ACK=79, data = ‘C’
host ACKs receipt
of‘C’, echoes back ‘C’
Seq=79, ACK=43, data = ‘C’
host ACKs receipt
of echoed ‘C’
Seq=43, ACK=80
250
RTT (milliseconds)
200
sampleRTT
150
EstimatedRTT
100
1 8 15 22 29 36 43 50 57 64 71 78 85 92 99 106
time (seconnds)
time (seconds)
SampleRTT Estimated RTT
Transport Layer: 3-82
TCP round trip time, timeout
timeout interval: EstimatedRTT plus “safety margin”
• large variation in EstimatedRTT: want a larger safety margin
TimeoutInterval = EstimatedRTT + 4*DevRTT
* Check out the online interactive exercises for more examples: http://gaia.cs.umass.edu/kurose_ross/interactive/
Transport Layer: 3-83
TCP Sender (simplified)
event: data received from event: timeout
application retransmit segment that
caused timeout
create segment with seq #
restart timer
seq # is byte-stream number
of first data byte in segment
event: ACK received
start timer if not already
running if ACK acknowledges
previously unACKed segments
• think of timer as for oldest
unACKed segment • update what is known to be
ACKed
• expiration interval:
TimeOutInterval • start timer if there are still
unACKed segments
Transport Layer: 3-84
TCP Receiver: ACK generation [RFC 5681]
Event at receiver TCP receiver action
arrival of in-order segment with delayed ACK. Wait up to 500ms
expected seq #. All data up to for next segment. If no next segment,
expected seq # already ACKed send ACK
SendBase=92
Seq=92, 8 bytes of data Seq=92, 8 bytes of data
timeout
timeout
SendBase=120
timeout
Receipt of three duplicate ACKs
indicates 3 segments received Seq=100, 20 bytes of data
TCP
code
Network layer
delivering IP datagram
payload into TCP
IP
socket buffers
code
from sender
TCP
code
Network layer
delivering IP datagram
payload into TCP
IP
socket buffers
code
from sender
TCP
code
receive window
flow control: # bytes
receiver willing to accept IP
code
from sender
TCP
flow control code
application application
network network
choose x
req_conn(x)
ESTAB
acc_conn(x)
ESTAB
data(x+1) accept
ACK(x+1) data(x+1)
connection
x completes
No problem!
choose x
req_conn(x)
ESTAB
retransmit acc_conn(x)
req_conn(x)
ESTAB
req_conn(x)
connection
client x completes server
terminates forgets x
ESTAB
acc_conn(x)
Problem: half open
connection! (no client)
Transport Layer: 3-99
2-way handshake scenarios
choose x
req_conn(x)
ESTAB
retransmit acc_conn(x)
req_conn(x)
ESTAB
data(x+1) accept
data(x+1)
retransmit
data(x+1)
connection
x completes server
client
terminates forgets x
req_conn(x)
ESTAB
data(x+1) accept
data(x+1)
Problem: dup data
accepted!
TCP 3-way handshake
Server state
serverSocket = socket(AF_INET,SOCK_STREAM)
Client state serverSocket.bind((‘’,serverPort))
serverSocket.listen(1)
clientSocket = socket(AF_INET, SOCK_STREAM) connectionSocket, addr = serverSocket.accept()
LISTEN
clientSocket.connect((serverName,serverPort)) LISTEN
choose init seq num, x
send TCP SYN msg
SYNSENT SYNbit=1, Seq=x
choose init seq num, y
send TCP SYNACK
msg, acking SYN SYN RCVD
SYNbit=1, Seq=y
ACKbit=1; ACKnum=x+1
received SYNACK(x)
ESTAB indicates server is live;
send ACK for SYNACK;
this segment may contain ACKbit=1, ACKnum=y+1
client-to-server data
received ACK(y)
indicates client is live
ESTAB
1. On belay?
2. Belay on.
3. Climbing.
two flows
R R
no retransmissions needed
Host B
R/2
Q: What happens as
lout
delay
arrival rate lin
throughput:
approaches R/2?
lin R/2 lin R/2
maximum per-connection large delays as arrival rate
throughput: R/2 lin approaches capacity
Transport Layer: 3-106
Causes/costs of congestion: scenario 2
one router, finite buffers
sender retransmits lost, timed-out packet
• application-layer input = application-layer output: lin = lout
• transport-layer input includes retransmissions : l’in lin
R R
throughput: lout
Host A lin : original data lin
copy lout R/2
l'in: original data, plus
retransmitted data
R R
no buffer space!
R R
throughput: lout
full buffers
when sending at
sender knows when packet has been dropped: R/2, some packets
only resends if packet known to be lost are needed
retransmissions
R R
throughput: lout
to un-needed
full buffers – requiring retransmissions retransmissions
but sender times can time out prematurely,
sending two copies, both of which are delivered when sending at
R/2, some packets
are retransmissions,
including needed
lin : original data and un-needed
Host A lin duplicates, that are
copy
timeout R/2
l'in: original data, plus delivered!
retransmitted data
R R
throughput: lout
to un-needed
full buffers – requiring retransmissions retransmissions
but sender times can time out prematurely,
sending two copies, both of which are delivered when sending at
R/2, some packets
are retransmissions,
including needed
and un-needed
lin R/2 duplicates, that are
delivered!
“costs” of congestion:
more work (retransmission) for given receiver throughput
unneeded retransmissions: link carries multiple copies of a packet
• decreasing maximum achievable throughput
Host D
lout
Host C
lin’ R/2
throughput: lout
throughput can never exceed capacity
lin R/2
delay
R/2
lin R/2
lout
loss/retransmission decreases effective
throughput:
throughput
lin R/2 R/2
throughput: lout
effective throughput
R/2
lin R/2
lout
wasted for packets lost downstream
lin’ R/2
router
may indicate congestion level or
explicitly set sending rate
TCP ECN, ATM, DECbit protocols
Transport Layer: 3-117
Chapter 3: roadmap
Transport-layer services
Multiplexing and demultiplexing
Connectionless transport: UDP
Principles of reliable data transfer
Connection-oriented transport: TCP
Principles of congestion control
TCP congestion control
Evolution of transport-layer
functionality
Transport Layer: 3-118
TCP congestion control: AIMD
approach: senders can increase sending rate until packet loss
(congestion) occurs, then decrease sending rate on loss event
Additive Increase Multiplicative Decrease
increase sending rate by 1 cut sending rate in half at
maximum segment size every each loss event
RTT until loss detected
TCP sender Sending rate
AIMD sawtooth
behavior: probing
for bandwidth
Why AIMD?
AIMD – a distributed, asynchronous algorithm – has been
shown to:
• optimize congested flow rates network wide!
• have desirable stability properties
RTT
• initially cwnd = 1 MSS
• double cwnd every RTT
• done by incrementing cwnd
for every ACK received
summary: initial rate is
slow, but ramps up
exponentially fast time
Implementation:
variable ssthresh
on loss event, ssthresh is set to
1/2 of cwnd just before loss event
* Check out the online interactive exercises for more examples: http://gaia.cs.umass.edu/kurose_ross/interactive/
Transport Layer: 3-123
Summary: TCP congestion control
New
New ACK!
ACK! new ACK
duplicate ACK
dupACKcount++ new ACK .
cwnd = cwnd + MSS (MSS/cwnd)
dupACKcount = 0
cwnd = cwnd+MSS transmit new segment(s), as allowed
dupACKcount = 0
L transmit new segment(s), as allowed
cwnd = 1 MSS
ssthresh = 64 KB cwnd > ssthresh
dupACKcount = 0
slow L congestion
start timeout avoidance
ssthresh = cwnd/2
cwnd = 1 MSS duplicate ACK
timeout dupACKcount = 0 dupACKcount++
ssthresh = cwnd/2 retransmit missing segment
cwnd = 1 MSS
dupACKcount = 0
retransmit missing segment
timeout
New
ACK!
ssthresh = cwnd/2
cwnd = 1 New ACK
dupACKcount = 0
cwnd = ssthresh dupACKcount == 3
dupACKcount == 3 retransmit missing segment dupACKcount = 0
ssthresh= cwnd/2 ssthresh= cwnd/2
cwnd = ssthresh + 3 cwnd = ssthresh + 3
retransmit missing segment retransmit missing segment
fast
recovery
duplicate ACK
cwnd = cwnd + MSS
transmit new segment(s), as allowed
time
t0 t1 t2 t3 t4
Transport Layer: 3-126
TCP and the congested “bottleneck link”
TCP (classic, CUBIC) increase TCP’s sending rate until packet loss occurs
at some router’s output: the bottleneck link
source destination
application application
TCP TCP
network network
link link
physical physical
packet queue almost
never empty, sometimes
overflows packet (loss)
ECN=10 ECN=11
IP datagram
Transport Layer: 3-131
TCP fairness
Fairness goal: if K TCP sessions share same bottleneck link of
bandwidth R, each should have average rate of R/K
TCP connection 1
bottleneck
TCP connection 2 router
capacity R
Connection 1 throughput R
Transport Layer: 3-133
Fairness: must all network apps be “fair”?
Fairness and UDP Fairness, parallel TCP
multimedia apps often do not connections
use TCP application can open multiple
• do not want rate throttled by
congestion control parallel connections between two
hosts
instead use UDP:
• send audio/video at constant rate, web browsers do this , e.g., link of
tolerate packet loss rate R with 9 existing connections:
there is no “Internet police” • new app asks for 1 TCP, gets rate R/10
policing use of congestion • new app asks for 11 TCPs, gets R/2
control
Network IP IP
TCP handshake
(transport layer) QUIC handshake
data
TLS handshake
(security)
data
GET GET
HTTP
GET QUIC QUIC QUIC QUIC QUIC QUIC
encrypt encrypt encrypt encrypt encrypt encrypt
QUIC QUIC QUIC QUIC QUIC QUIC
TLS encryption TLS encryption RDT RDT RDT RDT
error!
RDT RDT
SYN
SYN sent
rcvd
SYNACK(seq=y,ACKnum=x+1)
ESTAB
ACK(ACKnum=y+1) ACK(ACKnum=y+1)
L
LAST_ACK
FINbit=1, seq=y
TIMED_WAIT can no longer
send data
ACKbit=1; ACKnum=y+1
timed wait
for 2*max CLOSED
segment lifetime
CLOSED
W/2
TCP over “long, fat pipes”
example: 1500 byte segments, 100ms RTT, want 10 Gbps throughput
requires W = 83,333 in-flight segments
throughput in terms of segment loss probability, L [Mathis 1997]:
1.22 . MSS
TCP throughput =
RTT L
➜ to achieve 10 Gbps throughput, need a loss rate of L = 2·10-10 – a
very small loss rate!
versions of TCP for long, high-speed scenarios