Advertisement

Mobile Networks and Applications

, Volume 5, Issue 1, pp 57–71 | Cite as

Improving TCP performance over wireless networks at the link layer

  • Christina Parsa
  • J.J. Garcia‐Luna‐Aceves
Article

Abstract

We present the transport unaware link improvement protocol (TULIP), which dramatically improves the performance of TCP over lossy wireless links, without competing with or modifying the transport- or network-layer protocols. TULIP is tailored for the half-duplex radio links available with today's commercial radios and provides a MAC acceleration feature applicable to collision-avoidance MAC protocols (e.g., IEEE 802.11) to improve throughput. TULIP's timers rely on a maximum propagation delay over the link, rather than performing a round-trip time estimate of the channel delay. The protocol does not require a base station and keeps no TCP state. TULIP is exceptionally robust when bit error rates are high; it maintains high goodput, i.e., only those packets which are in fact dropped on the wireless link are retransmitted and then only when necessary. The performance of TULIP is compared against the performance of the Snoop protocol (a TCP-aware approach) and TCP without link-level retransmission support. The results of simulation experiments using the actual code of the Snoop protocol show that TULIP achieves higher throughput, lower packet delay, and smaller delay variance.

Keywords

Medium Access Control Data Packet Wireless Link Medium Access Control Protocol Packet Delay 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    P802.11-Unapproved Draft: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and physical specifications, Technical report, IEEE (January 1996).Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Metricom ricochet network, http://www.metricom.com, Metricom Inc., Los Gatos, CA 95032 (April 1998).Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    E. Ayanoglu, S. Paul, T. LaPorta, K. Sabnani and R. Gitlin, Airmail: A link-layer protocol for wireless networks, Wireless Networks 1(1) (1995) 47–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. [4]
    A. Bakre and B.R. Badrinath, I-TCP: Indirect TCP for mobile hosts, in: Proc. 15th IEEE Int. Conf. on Distributed Computing Systems, Vancouver, BC, Canada (May 1995) pp. 136–143.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    H. Balakrishnan, Personal communication, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA (November 1997).Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    H. Balakrishnan, V. Padmanabhan, S. Seshan and R. Katz, A comparison of mechanisms for improving TCP performance over wireless links, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking 6(5) (December 1997) 756–769.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. [7]
    H. Balakrishnan, S. Seshan and R. Katz, Improving reliable transport and handoff performance in cellular wireless networks, Wireless Networks (December 1995).Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    D. Bertsekas and R. Gallager, Data Networks, 2nd edn (Prentice-Hall, 1992).Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    D. Beyer and B. Nguyen, The C++ Protocol Toolkit: Overview, Rooftop Communications Technical Manual (1995).Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    K. Brown and S. Singh, M-TCP: TCP for mobile cellular networks, Computer Communication Review 27(5) (October 1997) 19–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. [11]
    R. Caceres and L. Iftode, Improving the performance of reliable transport protocols in mobile computing environments, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications 13(5) (1995).Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    H. Chaskar, T.V. Lakshman and U. Madhow, On the design of interfaces for TCP/IP over wireless, in: Proceedings MILCOM '96 Conference, Vol. 1, No. 3 (October 1996) pp. 199–203.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    A. DeSimone, M.C. Chuah and O.C. Yue, Throughput performance of transport-layer protocols over wireless LANs, in: Proc. IEEE Globecom '93, Houston, TX (November 1993) pp. 36–46.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    K. Fall and S. Floyd, Simulation-based comparisons of Tahoe, Reno, and SACK TCP, Computer Communication Review 26(3) (July 1996) 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. [15]
    C.L. Fullmer and J.J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves, Solutions to hidden terminal problems in wireless networks, in: Proc. SIGCOMM '97, Cannes, France (September 1997) pp. 39–49.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    C.L. Fullmer, Personal communication, Rooftop Communications Corp., Mountain View, CA 94041 (April 1998).Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    J.J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves, C.L. Fullmer, E. Madruga, D. Beyer and T. Frivold, Wireless Internet Gateways (WINGS), in: Proc. MILCOM '97, Monterey, California (November 1997).Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    V. Jacobson and M. Karels, Congestion avoidance and control, in: Proc. SIGCOMM '88, Stanford, CA (August 1988) pp. 16–19.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    S. Keshav, Real: a network simulator, Technical report 88/472, University of California, J. Wilkes, Wireless and Personal Communications Systems (American Telephone and Telegraph, 1996).Google Scholar
  20. [30]
    H.S. Wang and N. Moayeri, Finite-state Markov channel-a useful model for radio communication channels, IEEE Transactions on Vehicular Technology 44(1) (February 1995) 163–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Christina Parsa
    • 1
  • J.J. Garcia‐Luna‐Aceves
    • 1
  1. 1.Computer Engineering Department, Baskin School of EngineeringUniversity of CaliforniaSanta CruzUSA

Personalised recommendations