Re: FreeBSD CUBIC - Extremely low performance for short RTT setups experiencing congestion
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2023 08:57:04 UTC
Hi Bhaskar,
Personally, I'm not a big fan of having initial-RTT dependent toggling
of the behavior of a TCP session.
Two other approaches come to mind:
a) The separate TCP RACK stack already uses TCP_HPTS (high precicion
timer schedule) which yields a granularity of 1 usec. However, I believe
this does not actually improve the granularity of the RTT measurements
(and by extention, yield more precision in the Cubic calculation).
However, it may be an approach that when TCP_HPTS is compiled in, to
also increase the RTT measurement granularity to usec.
b) During congestion avoidance (CA), Cubic already has a linear cwnd
growth function, which is modelled to be equal to NewReno CA cwnd growth
- when the cube function is very close to its inflection point, and thus
nearly flat. It should be relatively straight forward, to also use the
actual NewReno CA growth function (1 / cnwd) in that conditional branch.
But the optimal fix is to heed the 8312bis document.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-tcpm-rfc8312bis/
The cubic algorithm in FreeBSD predates RFC8312, and 8312bis is in the
final states of getting published.
While the original RFC indeed specified a time-based calculation in the
concave region, the -bis document uses the actual acked segments (it is
written with a segment-oriented stack in mind, acked bytes when cwnd is
in bytes is equally valid.
Updating the FreeBSD Cubic module using 8312bis would be the best path
forward.
Best regards,
Richard
----------
Hi team,
I am a networking datapath engineer working at VMware. I primarily work
on VMware's ESX's TCP/IP stack. We have been playing around with
FreeBSD's CUBIC Congestion Control Algorithm (CCA) for a while. In most
of our performance tests, CUBIC is performing fine. However, we saw that
CUBIC results in performance degradation of around 100-150% in setups
where the following conditions are met
1. sender and receiver are back-to-back connected (short RTT)
2. back-to-back connection/link experiences congestion
We saw that the congestion window (cwnd) is not increasing fast enough
in the case of CUBIC, after experiencing a congestion event. On the same
setup, NewReno is performing very well and provides a very fast increase
in the cwnd after a congestion event.
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-tcpm-cubic-06 - CUBIC
Internet-Draft (I-D)
As per the I-D, it is mentioned that for short RTT (or even low BDP)
networks standard TCP CCAs perform better than CUBIC. Hence, in such
cases, the TCP-friendly window size (equation 4) will always come out to
be greater than the cubic window size (equation 1). Hence, we will focus
our discussion only on the TCP-friendly window size being calculated
during the congestion avoidance phase.
Theoretically, CUBIC should perform at least as better as standard TCP
for short RTT setups. However, in reality, this is not being observed.
We find that the granularity of the system's ticks value is causing
CUBIC to not grow the cwnd faster. I will explain this issue with an
example.
-------
Consider that we have a short RTT setup where the RTT is 0.05ms. Let us
assume that the system's tick frequency is 1000 HZ, i.e. the ticks value
will increase by 1, once every 1ms (FreeBSD probably has a 1ms tick timer).
Now let us consider a period of 1s. During this 1s period, the sender
will receive around 1s/0.05ms = 1000ms/0.05ms = 20000 ACKs.
Consequently, we will be calling the cc_ack_received() callback for each
of these ACKs. For NewReno, the cwnd will be increased for each of those
ACKs, till the TCP flow becomes limited by the receiver's window.
However, in CUBIC, even though the cubic_ack_received() callback is
invoked for each of those 20000 ACKs, the cwnd will not be increased for
each of those ACKs. This is because of the "ticks" value used to
calculate the time elapsed from the last congestion event. In FreeBSD
for a period of 1ms, the ticks value will be the same. In 1ms, we will
receive 1ms/0.05ms = 20 ACKs. For all of these 20 ACKs, ticks value will
be the same, the time elapsed from the last congestion will be the same,
and finally, the TCP-friendly window estimate will be the same. Hence,
cwnd will not increase for the entire 1ms duration. If a system has some
other timer period (for eg. 10ms), the cwnd will stay the same for that
entire period.
Of these 20000 ACKs, NewReno will try to increase the cwnd value for
almost every ACK. However, CUBIC will increase it only for 1000 ACKs.
That too distributed over a period of 1s. I hope the issue is now clear.
----
We wanted to discuss the solution to this issue. Currently, we have
thought of falling back to using the newreno way of doing congestion
avoidance when we are dealing with short RTT connections. This means
that if the mean RTT value maintained by CUBIC private data is less than
or equal to 1, we will use NewReno's way of doing congestion avoidance
to get a TCP-friendly window estimate. In other cases (non-short RTT),
we will use equation 4 of I-D to get the TCP-friendly estimate.
This will resolve the issue we are seeing. However, the only concern we
have in this approach is that this will make CUBIC RTT-dependent for
short RTT networks. As per the I-D I see the following
Another notable feature of CUBIC is that its window increase rate is
mostly independent of RTT, and follows a (cubic) function of the
elapsed time from the beginning of congestion avoidance.
So, we are not sure if logically this solution is right or not. Also, we
are not sure of any other implications this change might cause in CUBIC.
----
Adding Richard to the thread directly, as I have been following his work
on CUBIC for some time.
Thanks,
Bhaskar Pardeshi (bpardeshi@vmware.com)
VMware, Inc.