Advertisement

Interactions between the TCP and RLC Protocols in UMTS

  • Robert Bestak
  • Philippe Godlewski
  • Philippe Martins
Chapter

Abstract

Congestion control mechanisms, used in TCP, suffer from some performance issues when using them over wireless links. In this paper we investigate a TCP connection over the UMTS radio interface when using the RLC protocol in acknowledged mode. We compare protocol mechanisms used in TCP and RLC. The influence of the TCP congestion control mechanisms on the RLC buffer occupancy is analyzed and interactions between these two protocols are investigated.

Keywords

Transmission Control Protocol User Equipment Radio Interface Buffer Occupancy Radio Link Control 
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]
    E. Ayanoglu, S. Paul, T. F. LaPorta, K. K. Sabnami, and R. D Gitlin, “AIRMAIL: A link-layer protocol for wireless networks,” ACM ACM/Baltazer Wireless Networks Journal, February 1995.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Y. Bai, A. T. Ogielski, “TCP over asymmetric CDMA radio links,” Proc. IEEE Conf. on Vehicular Technology (VTC 2000 Fall), September 2000.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    A. Bakre, B.R. Badrinath, “I-TCP:Indirect TCP for mobile hosts,” Int. Conf. Distributed Computing Syst. (ICDCS), May 1995.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    H. Balakrishnan, V. Padmanabhan, S. Seshan, and R. H. Katz, “A comparison of mechanisms for improving TCP performance over wireless links,” ACM SIGCOM’96, August 1996.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    H. Balakrishnan, S. Seshan, and R. H. Katz, “Improving reliable transport and handoff performance in cellular wireless networks,” ACM Wireless Networks, December 1995.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    S. Biaz, N. H. Vaidya, “Distinguishing congestion losses from wireless transmission losses: a negative result,” Computer Communications and Networks, 1998.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    W. Ding and A. Jamalipour, “A new explicit loss notification with acknowledgment for wireless TCP,” Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications, September 2001.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    H. Holma, A. Toskala, “WCDMA for UMTS, Radio Access for Third Generation Mobile Communications,” John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, England 2000.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    T. J. Kostats, M. S. Borella, I. Sidhu, G. M. Schuster, J. Grabiec, J. Mahler, “Real-time voice over packet-switched networks,” IEEE Network, Jan.-Feb. 1998.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    T. V. Lakshman, U. Madlow, B. Suter, “Window based error recovery and flow control with a slow acknowledgment channel• a study of TCP/IP performance,” Proc. INFOCOM, April 1997.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    R. Ludwig, R. H. Katz, “The Eifel algorithm: Making TCP robust against spurious retransmission,” ACM Computer Communication Review, Vol. 30, No. 1, January 2000.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    S. Varna, “Performance and Buffering Requirements of TCP Application in Asymmetric Networks,” Proc. INFOCOM, March 1999.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    G TS 25.322 (2001–06), RLC protocol specification (Release 4).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert Bestak
    • 1
  • Philippe Godlewski
    • 1
  • Philippe Martins
    • 1
  1. 1.Department InfresEcole Nationale Supérieure des TélécommunicationsParis Cedex 13France

Personalised recommendations