[e2e] interaction between TCP and rate limiting in routers
shivkuma at ecse.rpi.edu
Tue Apr 2 07:33:23 PST 2002
Check out packeteer.com which has been doing this since 1995.
We wrote a paper with them in 2000 (TCP Rate control). See:
and references therein.
Associate Professor, Dept of ECSE, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute (RPI)
On Tue, 2 Apr 2002, Antonio Jose Elizondo wrote:
> Hi, I am also a lurker on this list, and also read it from time to (much) time.
> I presented a paper on "Capped Leaky Buckets" in ITC17 (2001). The goal of this
> bucket consists of providing a configured rate to each TCP flow.
> I've looked for the ITC17 proceedings in the web, but it seems that they are not
> published. However, you can find a previous work in the web, where capped leaky
> buckets are introduced:
> If anybody wants the most recent paper, the ITC17 version, please let me know.
> Antonio J. Elizondo
> JFellows at coppermountain.com wrote:
> > I'm a long time lurker on this list, but would like to now raise an issue
> > that I suspect is old hat to many of the members of this list.
> > I'm searching for the current best practice for implementing per flow or per
> > subscriber rate limits in edge routers. This is becoming a common request
> > from consumer oriented ISPs in both the cable and DSL markets. I've done
> > the Google search and read a half dozen papers that touch on this subject.
> > Many of the published papers refer to the classic 'sawtooth' behaviour of
> > TCP in this configuration. Some suggest that, in order to avoid multiple
> > consecutive discards, the token bucket that implements the rate limiter
> > should have a depth at least equal to the RTT*configured rate.
> > Are there any non-invasive (not involving on-the-fly modification of TCP
> > headers) implementations of rate limiters that allow TCP to run fairly
> > smoothly at the configured rate?
> > Jonathan
More information about the end2end-interest