Sei sulla pagina 1di 14

An  Analysis  of  TCP  Congestion  Control  Mechanisms  using  Wireshark  

 
Jayesh  Naithani  
SEIS  715  -­‐  Spring  2011  
 

Abstract  
 
This  paper  contains  detailed  analysis  of  two  Wireshark  traces  for  investigating  the  behavior  of  TCP  congestion  control  mechanisms.    The  paper  
will  analyze  the  following  aspects:  
 
x Basic  slow  start  and  congestion  avoidance  mechanisms  
x Fast  recovery:    a  variation  of  the  TCP  slow  start  mechanism  that  uses  fast  retransmit  followed  by  congestion  avoidance.  A  detailed  
packet  level  analysis  of  areas  within  each  trace  indicating  congestion  issues  will  be  performed.  
x Receiver-­‐advertised  flow  control  mechanisms  
x Throughput  and  round  trip  time  of  the  connection  
 
The  traces  captures  are  for  file  uploads  to  two  remote  social  media  sites  www.blip.tv  and  www.youtube.com.  

Overview  
͞ĞĐŽŶƐĞƌǀĂƚŝǀĞŝŶǁŚĂƚLJŽƵĚŽ͕ďĞůŝďĞƌĂůŝŶǁŚĂƚLJŽƵĂĐĐĞƉƚĨƌŽŵŽƚŚĞƌƐ͘͟dŚŝƐŝƐƚhe  Robustness  
WƌŝŶĐŝƉůĞŽƌWŽƐƚĞů͛Ɛ>Ăǁ͕ŶĂŵĞĚĂĨƚĞƌ:ŽŶWŽƐƚĞůǁŚŽǁƌŽƚĞĂďŽƵƚŝƚŝŶĂŶĞĂƌůLJƐƉĞĐŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶŽĨƚŚĞ
Transmission  Control  Protocol  (TCP)  [RFCϳϲϭ΁͘dW͛ƐƌŽďƵƐƚŶĞƐƐŝƐĂƌĞƐƵůƚŽĨits  reactive  behavior  when  
congestion  occurs,  and  it  then  uses  flow  and  congestion  control  mechanisms  in  order  to  reliably  send  
and  re-­‐transmit  data  from  one  end  of  the  network  to  the  other.  
 
Flow  control  is  a  mechanism  that  prevents  a  sender  from  sending  data  amounts  that  will  overwhelm  the  
ƌĞĐĞŝǀĞƌ͘dWĂĐŚŝĞǀĞƐƚŚŝƐƵƐŝŶŐƚŚĞƐůŝĚŝŶŐǁŝŶĚŽǁƉƌŽƚŽĐŽůǁŚĞƌĞƚŚĞƐĞŶĚĞƌ͛ƐǁŝŶĚŽǁŝƐŶĞǀĞƌůĂƌŐĞƌ
than  the  free  space  advertised  by  the  receiver.    Flow  of  data  is  controlled  by  the  receiver  sending  
feedback  to  the  sender.    Congestion  control  is  about  preventing  the  sender  from  sending  data  that  will  
end  up  getting  dropped  by  the  network.    Congestion  control  is  controlled  by  the  sender,  and  it  uses  a  
congestion  window  and  policy  to  avoid,  detect,  and  alleviate  congestion  after  it  has  occurred  
[FOROUZAN].  
 
This  paper  contains  an  analysis  of  congestion  control  mechanisms  observed  in  two  network  traces  
captured  using  Wireshark  version  1.4.6.    The  traces  capture  file  uploads  to  social  media  sites  -­‐  
www.youtube.com  and  www.blip.tv.    The  files  were  uploaded  from  a  laptop  over  a  home  wireless  
connection.    The  focus  of  both  analyses  ŝƐƚŽŽďƐĞƌǀĞĂŶĚĚĞƐĐƌŝďĞdW͛ƐŐĞŶĞƌĂůĐŽŶŐĞƐƚŝŽŶƉŽůŝĐLJǁŚŝĐŚ
consists  of  four  algorithms  [RFC  2001]:    Slow  Start,  Congestion  Avoidance,  Fast  Transmit,  and  Fast  
Recovery.  

Analysis  Method  
A  filter  was  applied  to  each  trace  to  display  only  the  TCP  connection  between  the  source  and  
destination.  For  each  trace  the  three  way  handshake  is  analyzed  to  determine  congestion  control  
information  being  negotiated  at  the  time  of  connection  establishment.    Information  gathered  during  the  
handshake  consists  of  the  sender  and  receiver  advertised  Window  Sizes  (rwnd),  Maximum  Segment  Size  
(MSS),  whether  a  Window  Scale  option  (WS)  is  being  used,  and  if  the  sender  and  receiver  support  
Selective  Acknowledgement  (SACK)  options  [RFC2018].  
An Analysis of TCP Congestion Control Mechanisms using Wireshark  
 

 
Then  Wireshark  analysis  capabilities  are  used  to  gather  information  about  Errors  and  Warning  
information  contained  in  the  trace.    The  Warnings  tab  provides  both  summarized  and  specific  packet  
numbers  where  Fast  Retransmission,  Out-­‐of-­‐Order  segments,  Window  Full  Updates  events  have  
occurred  within  the  trace.    The  Notes  tab  provides  information  about  packets  where  Retransmission  and  
Duplicate  ACKs  were  detected.  
 
Each  of  the  traces  revealed  some  packet  loss,  as  indicated  by  Fast  Retransmissions  and  Retransmission.    
The  packets  that  indicated  Duplicate  ACKs  and  Fast  Retransmissions  where  analyzed  to  see  how  missing  
segments  information  was  provided  and  re-­‐sent  using  TCP.    Both  traces  indicated  the  use  of  TCP  using  
the  Selective  Acknowledgement  algorithm  to  allow  the  sender  to  only  re-­‐transmit  segments  that  were  
dropped  [RFC2018,  RFC3782].      
 
The  analysis  also  makes  use  of  Wireshark  graphing  capabilities  to  show  round  trip  time  for  ACKs  over  
time  (Round  Trip  Time  Graph),  transmission  throughput  using  TCP  sequence  numbers  (Throughput  
Graph),  sequence  number  versus  time  graphs  that  help  to  see  if  traffic  is  moving  along  without  
interruption,  packet  loss,  or  long  delays  (Time-­‐Sequence  Graph  -­‐  Stevens/tcptrace).    The  IO  Graph  
capabilities  are  also  used  to  show  TCP  information  about  Window  Size,  Bytes  in  flight,  estimated  RTT,  
and  areas  in  the  trace  where  packet  loss  was  detected.    Trace  Analysis  #1  is  more  detailed,  and  makes  
use  of  a  number  of  charts  to  show  congestion  avoidance  behavior.    Trace  Analysis  #2  is  more  about  the  
analysis  of  the  Fast  Retransmit,  a  couple  of  new  events  (TCP  Window  Full,  Window  Scale  factor)  that  
were  captured  in  the  trace.    An  unusual  data  transmission  pattern  was  observed  in  the  second  trace  as  
well.    There  are  short  gaps  in  traffic  flow  between  the  sender  and  receiver    which  do  not  appear  to  be  
related  to  network  congestion  or  end-­‐to-­‐end  flow  control.  

Trace  Analysis  #1  


The  first  trace  analysis  is  of  a  153  MB  video  file  upload  to  www.blip.tv  over  HTTP.    The  file  was  uploaded  
from  my  home  laptop  over  a  wireless  connection.  
 
Source  IP  address:  192.168.1.104,  Source  TCP  port:    53323  
Destination  IP  address:    98.124.167.251,  Destination  TCP  port:  80  

Trace  Summary  
The  trace  analysis  was  performed  using  Wireshark  Version  1.4.5,  on  laptop  running  Windows  7  
Enterprise  Edition.  
 
The  Wireshark  Expert  Info  Composite  window  reveals  the  following  information:  
 
Errors:    1  
  -­‐  1  Malformed  TDS  -­‐  Malformed  Packet  (Exception  occurred)  
Warnings:  366    
  -­‐  315  Fast  Retransmissions  
  -­‐  47  Out-­‐of-­‐Order  segments  
  -­‐  3  Previous  segment  lost    
  -­‐  1  Zero  window    
Notes:    5241  
2  

 
An Analysis of TCP Congestion Control Mechanisms using Wireshark  
 

  -­‐  4910  (35)  Several  Duplicate  ACKs  


  -­‐  231  (1)  Retransmissions  suspected  
 
The  Packet  Lengths  statistics  distribution  window  indicates  that  59.73%  of  the  packet  lengths  during  the  
file  upload  were  between  1280-­‐2559  (MSS  =  1460).  
 
The  following  Time-­‐Sequence  graph  for  the  connection  shows  a  reasonable  slope,  equal  to  the  
maximum  bandwidth  from  end-­‐to-­‐end.  
 

 
Time-­‐Sequence  Graph  for  the  connection  duration  
 

Three  Way  Handshake  


Packets  #801,  #803,  #804  show  the  three  way  handshake.      

Packet  #801  
The  source  begins  with  a  SYN  containing  a  32  bit  sequence  number  257939964  (relative  sequence  
number  0).  The  sender  advertises  a  Window  Size  of  8192  bytes.    There  is  no  data  sent  in  this  segment  -­‐    
Len  is  0.    The  Maximum  Segment  Size  (MSS)  is  1460,  and  TCP  SACK  Permitted  option  is  set  to  True.    The  
SACK  Permitted  option  indicates  that  the  sender  can  receive  and  interpret  the  SACK  option.    The  MSS  
ĚĞĨŝŶĞƐƚŚĞůĞŶŐƚŚŽĨĚĂƚĂƐĞŶƚŝŶĞĂĐŚƐĞŐŵĞŶƚ͘/ƚĂůƐŽŝƐƚŚĞŝŶŝƚŝĂůƐŝnjĞŽĨƚŚĞƐĞŶĚĞƌ͛ƐĐŽŶŐĞƐƚŝŽŶ
window  (cwnd).  

Packet  #803  
The  receiver  responds  with  a  SYN-­‐ACK,  and  sends  frame  with  an  independent  sequence  number  
2334796346  (relative  sequence  number  0).    It  sends  an  increment  of  the  sequence  number  received  in  
the  last  segment,  in  its  Acknowledgement  field  (A),  257939965  (relative  ack  number  1).    The  
3  

 
An Analysis of TCP Congestion Control Mechanisms using Wireshark  
 

Acknowledgement  numbeƌŝŶĨŽƌŵƐƚŚĞƌĞĐĞŝǀĞƌƚŚĂƚŝƚ͛ƐĚĂƚĂŚĂƐďĞĞŶƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĂŶĚƚŚĂƚŝƚĞdžƉĞĐƚƐƚŚĞ
next  sequence  number  to  start  at  A  +  x,  where  x  is  the  number  of  octets  that  make  up  the  data  in  this  
ƐĞŐŵĞŶƚ͘dŚĞƌĞĐĞŝǀĞƌ͛ƐǁŝŶĚŽǁ;ƌǁŶĚͿƐŝnjĞŝƐϱϴϰϬďLJƚĞƐ;ŽƌϰƚŝŵĞƐƚŚĞMSS  value).  

Packet  #804  
The  source  receives  the  SYN-­‐ACK  segment,  and  sends  an  ACK  segment  containing  the  next  sequence  
number  2334796347  (relative  ack  number  1).    The  SYN  sequence  number  is  incremented  by  1  to  
257939965  (relative  sequence  number  1).    The  sender  also  defines  the  server  window  size,  to  17520  
ďLJƚĞƐ͘&ŽƌϭϬĂŶĚϭϬϬDďƉƐƚŚĞƌŶĞƚĐŽŶŶĞĐƚŝŽŶƐ͕ŽŶtŝŶĚŽǁƐϳƚŚĞƐĞŶĚĞƌ͛ƐƌĞĐĞŝǀĞǁŝŶĚŽǁŝƐƵƐƵĂůůLJ
set  to  17,520  bytes  (17  KB  rounded  up  to  12  1460  byte  segments)  [TOMPB-­‐2].  

Slow  Start  and  Congestion  Avoidance  


Once  the  connection  is  established,  TCP  starts  slowly  to  determine  the  bandwidth  of  the  connection  and  
to  avoid  overflowing  the  receiving  host  and  other  devices  or  links  in  the  path.  

Packet  #805  
A  single  packet  of  size  1023  is  sent  with  the  PSH  flag  set.    The  PSH  flag  indicates  to  the  receiver  that  the  
contents  of  the  receive  buffer  should  be  immediately  passed  to  the  application  layer.    

Packet  #806  
Another  DATA  packet  of  size  1460  (MSS)  is  sent.    At  this  point  there  are  2483  bytes  of  in  flight  or  
unacknowledged  data  on  the  wire.    I  

Packet  #807    
The  receiver  acknowledges  (ACK)  data  sent  by  the  sender.    A  window  size  (rwnd)  of  7161  is  also  
advertised  by  the  receiver  with  this  ACK.  
 
When  the  connection  was  established,  a  congestion  window  (cwnd)  of  size  1  MSS  (size  1460  bytes)  is  
initialized.    Each  time  an  ACK  is  received  this  congestion  window  is  increased  by  1  MSS.    With  ACK  sent  
with  Packet  #807,  the  congestion  window  size  is  increased  by  1,  i.e.,  cwnd  =  cwnd  +  1  MSS,  or  2  MSS  =  
2920  bytes.  
 
In  slow  start,  the  sender  can  transmit  up  to  the  minimum  of  the  value  of  the  cwnd  and  the  rwnd.    This  is  
ƚŚĞůŽǁĞƌďŽƵŶĚŽĨƚŚĞƐĞŶĚĞƌ͛ƐdWǁŝŶĚŽǁƐŝnjĞ͘/ŶŽƚŚĞƌǁŽƌĚƐ͕ƚŚĞĂŵŽƵŶƚŽĨƵŶ-­‐acknowledged  data  
will  always  be  the  minimum  of  the  cwnd  and  rwnd  size  in  bytes.  In  Frame  #808,  the  sender  sends  DATA  
of  size  1460  bytes.    At  this  point  the  unacknowledged  data  is  2920  bytes  (2  *  1460),  or  equal  to  the  value  
of  cwnd.  

Packet  #959  
This  pattern  of  sending  DATA  and  receiving  ACKs  between  the  sender  and  receiver  continues  and  at  this  
point  there  are  49152  bytes  of  un-­‐ACKed  data  on  the  wire  and  the  rwnd  is  64240  bytes.      
 
The  value  of  the  congestion  window  size  is  not  something  that  can  be  obtained  directly  from  a  TCP  
Wireshark  trace.  However,  we  can  plot  the  amount  of  data  that  the  sender  has  in  flight  using  the  IO  
Graph  feature.  This  can  sometimes  give  a  good  indication  of  the  cwnd  size.    When  the  amount  of  data  
being  sent  reaches  the  size  of  the  receive  window,  the  slow  start  algorithm  may  no  longer  be  in  use  and  
flow  of  data  is  controlled  by  the  receiver  using  the  advertised  window  size  [MSDN].      
 
4  

 
An Analysis of TCP Congestion Control Mechanisms using Wireshark  
 

When  congestion  is  encountered,  as  indicated  in  the  trace  by  a  fast  retransmission,  a  congestion  
ĂǀŽŝĚĂŶĐĞĂůŐŽƌŝƚŚŵŝƐƵƐĞĚƚŽƌĞĚƵĐĞƚŚĞƐĞŶĚĞƌ͛ƐǁŝŶĚŽǁƐŝnjĞ͕ĂŶĚƚŽŐƌŽǁŝƚďĂĐŬtowards  the  
ƌĞĐĞŝǀĞƌ͛ƐĂĚǀĞƌƚŝƐĞĚǁŝŶĚŽǁƐŝnjĞ͘ŽŶŐĞƐƚŝŽŶĂǀŽŝĚĂŶĐĞƌĞƋƵŝƌĞƐƚŚĂƚĂŶŽƚŚĞƌǀĂƌŝĂďůĞďĞŵĂŝŶƚĂŝŶĞĚ
called  the  slow  start  threshold  or  ssthresh.    The  initial  value  of  ssthresh  is  arbitrarily  high,  and  as  much  
as  the  largest  possible  advertised  window  size  of  65535  bytes  [RFC2001,  RFC2581].  
 

 
Fast  Transmission  with  SACK  TCP,  and  Retransmissions  

Fast  Retransmission  with  SACK  TCP,  Retransmission  

Packet  #961,  #962,  #963  (Duplicate  ACK)  


The  TCP  receiver  sends  a  duplicate  ACK  to  Packet  #960.    This  indicates  that  an  out-­‐of-­‐order  segment  has  
arrived,  and  the  sequence  number  expected  is  102248  (Packet  #914).    After  three  ACKs  for  the  same  
sequence  number  are  received  (Packets  #961  #962,  #963),  the  send  performs  an  immediate  re-­‐
transmission  of  the  missing  segment  with  Packet  #964.  
 
Here  we  also  see  that  Selective  Acknowledgements  (SACKS)  by  the  receiver  are  used  to  inform  the  
sender  of  data  that  has  been  received  out-­‐of-­‐order  ([SLE=105168,  SRE=106628]).    The  beginning  and  end  
of  the  blocks  are  indicated  by  SLE  (Left  Edge)  and  SRE  (Right  Edge  )[RFC2883].    The  sender  then  re-­‐
transmits  only  the  missing  data  segments.    

5  

 
An Analysis of TCP Congestion Control Mechanisms using Wireshark  
 

Packet  #963,  #964  (Fast  Retransmission)  


The  receiver  informs  the  sender  of  an  updated  list  of  blocks  that  have  arrived  out  of  order.),  i.e.,  
[SLE=109548,  SRE=112468],  [SLE=105168,  SRE=108088].    With  the  re-­‐transmit  of  1460  bytes  in  Packet  
#964,  the  receiver  indicates  an  updates  to  the  list  of  blocks  -­‐    [SLE=109548,  SRE=113928],  [SLE=105168,  
SRE=108088].  
 
With  Fast  Re-­‐transmit,  TCP  re-­‐transmits  the  missing  segments  before  the  retransmission  timer  expires.  
A  fast  re-­‐transmission  re-­‐transmits  the  missing  segment,  and  also  sets  the  value  for  the  slow  start  
threshold  to  be  0.5  *  cwnd,  and  the  new  cwnd  value  to  ssthresh  +  3.    For  every  subsequent  duplicate  
<͕ƚŚĞƐĞŶĚĞƌ͛ƐĐǁŶĚŝƐŝŶĐƌĞĂƐĞĚďLJϭƐĞŐŵĞŶƚ͘tŚĞŶĂŶĞǁ<ŝƐƌĞĐĞŝǀĞĚĐǁŶĚŝƐƐĞƚƚŽďĞƚŚĞ
ssthresh  value  and  TCP  resumes  congestion  avoidance.      
 
TCP  with  Selective  Acknowledgement  (SACK)  is  an  extension  of  the  TCP  Reno  algorithm.      So  it  does  
retain  the  slow  start  and  fast  retransmit  parts  of  RENO.    And  it  works  around  some  of  the  problems  
faced  by  TCP  Reno  and  TCP  New  Reno  [RFC3782].    These  problems  are  namely  the  detection  of  multiple  
lost  packets,  and  re-­‐transmission  of  more  than  one  lost  packet  per  Round  Trip  Time  (RTT).    

Packet  #972  (Enter  Fast  Recovery)  


After  the  missing  segment  has  been  sent  with  Packet  #964,  the  Fast  Recovery  algorithm  controls  the  
transmission  of  a  new  data  until  the  first  non-­‐duplicate  ACK  arrives.  

 
Packets  #914,  #915,  #918  

Packet  #966,  #968  (Retransmission  of  segment  in  Packet  #915)  


We  see  a  TCP  Retransmission  with  these  packets  for  Packet  #915.    This  is  because  the  sender  did  not  
receive  an  acknowledgement  for  the  data  sent  in  Packet  #915  before  its  Retransmission  Timer  expired.    
6  

 
An Analysis of TCP Congestion Control Mechanisms using Wireshark  
 

A  Retransmission  Timer  is  started  every  time  TCP  sends  a  segment.    It  is  the  waiting  time  for  an  ACK  for  
the  segment.    If  the  time  expires,  the  assumption  is  that  the  segment  is  lost.    The  RTO  for  segment  being  
retransmitted  in  Packet  #966  was  0.053786  seconds.    

Packet  #968,  #971,  #973  (Retransmission  of  segment  in  Packet  #918)  
These  packets  indicate  a  TCP  Retransmission  for  the  segment  in  Packet  #918.    The  RTO  for  segment  sent  
with  Packet  #968  was  0.058455  seconds.  

Packet  #997  -­‐  #1102  


These  packets  acknowledge  the  previously  retransmitted  packets.  

Packet  #1002  (First  non-­‐duplicate  ACK,  exit  Fast  Recovery,  enter  Congestion  Avoidance)  
Packet  #1002  is  a  cumulative  ACK,  and  acknowledges  all  pending  packets.      It  contains  an  ACK  for  all  
Packets  up  to  Packet  #959.    With  the  arrival  of  a  non-­‐duplicate  ACK,  the  congestion  avoidance  algorithm  
is  enforced  by  TCP.    Congestion  avoidance  algorithm  increases  the  Congestion  Window  additively  
(Additive  Increase/Multiplicative  Decrease)  instead  of  exponentially.  

Traffic  Flow,  Throughput,  and  Round  Trip  Time  


The  following  set  of  graphs  provides  a  view  of  a  section  of  the  trace  which  includes  the  packets  analyzed  
in  the  previous  section  ʹ  from  Packets  801  through  186588.  
 
The  IO  graph  displays,  over  time,  the  TCP  receiver  advertised  window  size  (black  line),  the  number  of  
bytes  in  flight  that  have  not  been  acknowledged  (red  line),  the  round  trip  time  (RTT)  for  ACKs  (green  
line),  and  the  areas  where  duplicate  acknowledgements  (purple  dot)  and  fast  retransmits  (blue  dot)  
events  occurred.  
 

 
IO  Graph  

7  

 
An Analysis of TCP Congestion Control Mechanisms using Wireshark  
 

 
Fast  Retransmits  coincide  with  a  reduction  in  the  number  of  unacknowledged  bytes  in  flight.    But  not  all  
Fast  Retransmits  result  in  all  bytes  in  flight  being  acknowledged,  but  only  up  to  the  bytes  in  the  packet  
that  initiated  the  Fast  Retransmission.  
 
The  Time-­‐Sequence  graph  for  the  same  period  indicates  there  are  gaps  (circled  in  red)  between  
sequence  numbers,  indicating  congestion  in  the  network.    These  gaps  also  coincide  with  the  Fast  
Retransmission  and  Retransmission  events  in  the  trace.  
 

 
Time-­‐Sequence  Graph  
 
The  Round  Trip  Time  graph  for  ACKs  indicates  many  dots  that  are  clustered  closer  towards  the  x  axis  
indicating  a  consistent  response  time  [TOMPB-­‐2,  CHAPT2-­‐8],  but  there  are  a  quite  a  few  dots  that  are  
steeply  climbing  towards  the  top.    The  dots  circled  in  red  are  during  the  time  the  Fast  Retransmits  occur,  
and  show  maximum  length  in  RTT.  
 

8  

 
An Analysis of TCP Congestion Control Mechanisms using Wireshark  
 

 
Round  Trip  Time  Graph  
 
Finally,  the  Throughput  graph  indicates  time  slots  where  nothing  is  being  sent.    Areas  where  Fast  
Retransmission  and  Retransmission  areas  are  circled  in  red,  in  both  graphs.  
 

 
Throughput  Graph  

9  

 
An Analysis of TCP Congestion Control Mechanisms using Wireshark  
 

Trace  Analysis  #2  


This  is  a  trace  analysis  of  a  73  MB  video  file  upload  to  www.youtube.com  over  HTTP.    The  file  was  
uploaded  from  my  home  laptop  over  a  wireless  connection.  
 
Source  IP  address:  192.168.1.105,  Source  TCP  port:    63870  
Destination  IP  address:    192.168.1.105  Destination  TCP  port:  80  
 
The  most  interesting  things  in  this  trace  were  the  use  of  a  Window  Scale  option  by  the  receiver  and  
sender  to  allow  support  for  larger  receiver  buffers  on  each  end.    The  Wireshark  trace  also  detected  
several  (21)  TCP  Window  Full  warning  events  and  a  few  (4)  suspect  Fast  Retransmits  for  the  duration  of  
the  transmission.    A  detailed  analysis  follows  below.  
 

 
Expert  Info  Composite  View  

Packet  #26  (SYN)  


The  SYN  from  the  source  with  relative  sequence  number  0  advertises  a  Window  Size  of  8192  bytes.    
Data  sent  is  0.    The  Maximum  Segment  Size  (MSS)  is  set  to  1460.    The  TCP  SACK  Permitted  option  is  set  
to  true  to  indicate  the  sender  supports  the  SACK  option.    The  SYN  contains  a  Window  Scale  option  of  2.    
The  sender  is  indicating  it  is  prepared  to  do  both  send  and  receive  window  scaling  [RFC2018].  

Packet  #36  (SYN-­‐ACK)  


The  receiver  sends  back  a  <SYN,ACK>  and  advertises  a  window  size  of  5720  bytes.    It  also  indicates  it  
supports  the  SACK  option,  and  sends  its  own  Window  Scale  option  of  6.    This  essentially  indicates  that  
the  receiver  supports  a  window  size  of  64  *  the  advertised  window  size.    Scalable  windows  allow  
multiple  large  packets  to  be  pending  in  the  receivers  buffers  and  are  used  often  in  file  transfer  protocols.  

Packet  #37  (ACK)  


The  source  receives  the  <SYN-­‐ACK>  segment,  and  sends  an  ACK  segment  containing  the  next  relative  
sequence  number  1.    The  ƐĞŶĚĞƌĚĞĨŝŶĞƐŝƚ͛ƐƌĞĐĞŝǀĞǁŝŶĚŽǁƐŝnjĞƚŽďĞϭϳϱϮϬďLJƚĞƐ͘  

Packet  #243  (TCP  Window  Full)  


Wireshark  keeps  track  of  the  receivers  sliding  window.    The  TCP  Window  Full  flag  is  being  set  here  
because  the  payload  data  in  the  segment  will  completely  fill  the  rĞĐĞŝǀĞƌ͛Ɛ  received  data  buffer.    The  
10  

 
An Analysis of TCP Congestion Control Mechanisms using Wireshark  
 

number  of  bytes  in  flight  is  64128.    The  last  advertised  window  size  by  the  receiver  in  Packet  240  was  
64128.  

Packet  #13761,  #13762,  #13763  (TCP  Dup  ACK)  


Three  duplicate  ACKs  are  sent  by  the  receiver  to  indicate  to  the  sender  that  an  out-­‐of-­‐order  segment  has  
arrived  [SEIS715-­‐WEEK5].    Selective  Acknowledgement  is  used  by  the  receiver  to  indicate  the  SACK  block  
which  triggered  the  acknowledgements  ([547388,  5475318]),  in  Packet  #13761.    This  block  also  indicates  
the  list  of  duplicate  packets,  and  informs  the  sender  to  only  send  the  segment  that  is  lost.  
 
TCP  with  Selective  Acknowledgement  preserves  the  congestion  control  algorithms  present  in  standard  
TCP  implementations  (RFC  2581).      When  entering  fast  recovery  following  fast  retransmit,  the  following  
algorithm  will  be  followed.  
 
  ssthresh  =  max(FlightSize/2,  2*  MSS)  //  (1)  
   
cwnd  =  ssthresh  +  3  *  MSS    
   
For  each  additional  dup  ACK  
    cwnd  =  cwnd  +  MSS  
   
Transmit  a  segment  
 
When  next  ACK  arrives  that  acknowledges  new  data  
cwnd  =  ssthresh  //  value  in  (1)  
 
Enter  congestion  avoidance  phase  
 
[RFC2581]  

Packet  #13764  (Fast  Retransmission)  


The  sender  does  not  wait  for  retransmission  timer  (RTO)  to  expire  and  sends  only  the  missing  segment  
with  SEQ  number  5472580.      

Packet  #13765  (Enter  Fast  Recovery)  


TCP  enters  fast  recovery  stage,  until  first  non-­‐duplicate  ACK  received.  

Packet  #13766  (Non-­‐duplicate  ACK,  Enter  Congestion  Avoidance)  


TCP  enters  congestion  avoidance  stage  with  the  arrival  of  first  non-­‐duplicate  ACK.  This  is  a  cumulative  
acknowledgement  for  bytes  sent  up  to  Packet  #13658.    TCP  begins  Congestion  Avoidance  phase,  and  the  
congestion  window  is  increases  linearly  until  congestion  is  detected  or  the  maximum  sending  window  
size  is  reached.  

Traffic  Flow,  Throughput,  and  Round  Trip  Time  


The  IO  Flow  graph  for  Packets  #26  through  #30000  indicates  the  rwnd  (black  line),  bytes  in  flight  (red  
line),  ACCK  RTT  (green  line),  Fast  Retransmits  over  time  (blue  dots),  Window  Full  (purple).    TCP  with  
SACK  re-­‐transmits  allow  the  senders  TCP  to  only  send  the  packets  that  were  dropped.    

11  

 
An Analysis of TCP Congestion Control Mechanisms using Wireshark  
 

 
IO  Flow  

The  Time-­‐Sequence  for  the  connection  reveals  an  interesting  step-­‐ladder  like  pattern.  

 
Time-­‐Sequence  Graph  for  the  connection  

12  

 
An Analysis of TCP Congestion Control Mechanisms using Wireshark  
 

A  closer  look  into  the  areas  of  the  graph  where  the  sequence  numbers  are  not  increasing  over  time  
indicates  that  there  is  very  little  traffic  being  sent  from  the  sender.    Looking  over  the  trace  does  not  
provide  any  indication  of  a  problem  in  the  transmission.    However,  the  data  in  packets  sent  down  from  
the  server  show  HTTP  404  (page  not  found)  messages  during  these  periods.    Subsequently,  the  receiver  
waits  for  a  period  of  time  before  sending  data.    The  connection  at  all  times  remained  established.  

 
404  Not  Found  

The  following  throughput  graph  further  validates  gaps  in  the  transmission  where  there  is  very  little  
traffic  going  from  the  sender  to  the  receiver.  

 
Throughput  Graph  

13  

 
An Analysis of TCP Congestion Control Mechanisms using Wireshark  
 

Conclusion  
The  purpose  of  this  project  was  to  capture  and  analyze  congestion  control  mechanisms  observed  in  
Wireshark  traces  of  file  uploads  to  a  couple  of  popular  social  media  sites.    Information  exchanged  during  
TCP  connection  establishment  was  analyzed  for  each  trace.    A  detailed  analysis  of  sections  of  the  traces  
where  packet  loss  was  detected  was  performed  and  described  in  terms  of  the  Fast  Retransmit  and  Fast  
Recovery  algorithms  for  TCP  Congestion  Avoidance.    tŝƌĞƐŚĂƌŬ͛ƐƐƚĂƚŝƐtical  and  graphing  capabilities  
were  used  to  observe  the  traffic  flow,  throughput,  and  areas  where  congestion  events  were  observed.      

References  
΀Z&ϳϲϭ΁͞K^dEZdZE^D/^^/KEKEdZK>WZKdKK>͟http://tools.ietf.org/txt/rfc761.txt  (10  
January  1980)  
 
[RFC2001]  W͘^ƚĞǀĞŶƐ͕͞dW^ůŽǁ^ƚĂƌƚ͕ŽŶŐĞƐƚŝŽŶǀŽŝĚĂŶĐĞ͕&ĂƐƚZĞƚƌĂŶƐŵŝƚ͕ĂŶĚ&ĂƐƚZĞĐŽǀĞƌLJ
ůŐŽƌŝƚŚŵƐ͕͟http://tools.ietf.org/txt/rfc2001.txt,  (January  1997)  
 
[RFC2018]  M.  Mathis,  J.  Mahdavi,  S.  Floyd,  A.  RomanŽǁ͕͞dW^ĞůĞĐƚŝǀĞĐŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞŵĞŶƚKƉƚŝŽŶƐ͕͟
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2018.txt  (October  1996)  
 
΀Z&Ϯϱϴϭ΁D͘ůůŵĂŶ͕s͘WĂdžƐŽŶ͕t͘^ƚĞǀĞŶƐ͕͞dWŽŶŐĞƐƚŝŽŶŽŶƚƌŽů͕͟
http://tools.ietf.org/txt/rfc2581.txt,  (April  1999)  
 
΀Z&Ϯϴϴϯ΁^͘&ůŽLJĚ͕:͘DĂŚĚĂǀŝ͕D͘DĂƚŚŝƐ͕D͘WŽĚŽůƐŬLJ͕͞ŶdžƚĞŶƐŝŽŶƚŽƚŚĞ^ĞůĞĐƚŝǀĞ
ĐŬŶŽǁůĞĚŐĞŵĞŶƚ;^<ͿKƉƚŝŽŶĨŽƌdW͕͟http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2883.txt  (July  2000)  
 
[RFC3782]  S.  Floyd,  T.  Henderson,  A.  Gurtov,  ͞dŚĞEĞǁZĞŶŽDŽĚŝĨŝĐĂƚŝŽŶƚŽdW͛Ɛ&ĂƐƚZĞĐŽǀĞƌLJ
ůŐŽƌŝƚŚŵ͕͟http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3782.txt,  (April  2004)  
 
[FOROUZAN΁͘͘&ŽƌŽƵnjĂŶ͕͞dWͬ/WWƌŽƚŽĐŽů^ƵŝƚĞ͕ϰ͛ƚŚĚŝƚŝŽŶ͕͟DĐ'ƌĂǁ,ŝůů(2010)  
 
[SEIS715-­‐t<ϱ΁͘KĞůŬĞ͕͞^/^-­‐ϳϭϱtĞĞŬϱ͗dƌĂŶƐŵŝƐƐŝŽŶŽŶƚƌŽůWƌŽƚŽĐŽů͟ůĞĐƚƵƌĞŶŽƚĞƐ͕;DĂLJϮϬϭϭͿ  
 
΀D^E΁͞^ůŽǁƐƚĂƌƚĂŶĚŽŶŐĞƐƚŝŽŶǀŽŝĚĂŶĐĞůŐŽƌŝƚŚŵƐ͕͟http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-­‐
us/library/ms818965.aspx  
 
[CHAPT2-­‐ϴ΁>͘ŚĂƉƉĞůů͕͞dƌĂĐĞ&ŝůĞŶĂůLJƐŝƐ͗WĂĐŬĞƚ>ŽƐƐ͕ZĞƚƌĂŶƐŵŝƐƐŝŽŶƐ͕&ĂƐƚZĞƚƌĂŶƐŵŝƐƐŝŽŶƐ͕
Duplicate  ACKs,  ACK  Lost  Segment  and  Out-­‐of-­‐KƌĚĞƌWĂĐŬĞƚƐ͕͟
http://sharkfest.wireshark.org/sharkfest.08/T2-­‐8_Chappell_Trace-­‐File-­‐Analysis_Loss.pdf  ͕^ŚĂƌŬĨĞƐƚ͚Ϭϴ͕
(2  April  2008)  
 
[TOMPB-­‐Ϯ΁Z͘dŽŵƉŬŝŶƐ͕͞ŶĂůLJnjŝŶŐdWͬ/WEĞƚǁŽƌŬƐǁŝƚŚtŝƌĞƐŚĂƌŬ͕͟
http://sharkfest.wireshark.org/sharkfest.10/B-­‐
2_TompkinsAnalyzing%20TCPIP%20Networks%20with%20Wireshark.pdf͕^ŚĂƌŬĨĞƐƚ͚ϭϬ͕;ϭϰ:ƵŶĞϮϬϭϬͿ  

14  

Potrebbero piacerti anche