skip to main content
10.1145/285237.285248acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescommConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article
Free Access

Best-effort versus reservations: a simple comparative analysis

Authors Info & Claims
Published:01 October 1998Publication History

ABSTRACT

Using a simple analytical model, this paper addresses the following question: Should the Internet retain its best-effort-only architecture, or should it adopt one that is reservation-capable? We characterize the differences between reservation-capable and best-effort-only networks in terms of application performance and total welfare. Our analysis does not yield a definitive answer to the question we pose, since it would necessarily depend on unknowable factors such as the future cost of network bandwidth and the nature of the future traffic load. However, our model does reveal some interesting phenomena. First, in some circumstances, the amount of incremental bandwidth needed to make a best-effort-only network perform as well as a reservation capable one diverges as capacity increases. Second, in some circumstances reservation-capable networks retain significant advantages over best-effort-only networks, no matter how cheap bandwidth becomes. Lastly, we find bounds on the maximum performance advantage a reservation-capable network can achieve over best-effort architectures.

References

  1. 1.Jan Beran, Robert Sherman, Murad S. Taqqu, and Walter Willinger. Long-range dependence in variable-bit-rate video traffic. IEEE Transactions on Communications, 43(2):1566--1579, February 1995.]]Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. 2.R. Braden, Ed., L. Zhang, S. Berson, S. Herzog, (RSVP)- version 1 functional specification. Technical Report RFC 2205, Internet Engineering Task Force, September 1997.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. 3.Lee Breslau and Scott Shenker. Best-effort versus reservations: A simple comparative analysis. Submitted to ACM Transactions on Networking, June 1998.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.David D. Clark, Scott Shenker, and Lixia Zhang. Supporting real-time applications ill an integrated services packet network: Architecture and mechanism. In Proceedings of .4 (.7tll Sigcomm, pages 14--26, August 1992.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. 5.Mark Crovella and Azer Bestavros. Self-similarity in world wide web traffic: Evidence and possible causes. In Proceedings of SIGMETRICS '96, 1996.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. 6.Domenico Ferrari, Anindo Banerjea, and Hui Zhang. Network support for multimedia: A discussion of the Tenet. approach. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems, 10:1267-1280, July 1994.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. 7.Sally Floyd. Comments on measurement-based admissions control for controlled-load services. submitted to CCR, July 1996.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.Sugih Jamin, Peter B. Danzig, Scott J. Shenker, and Lixia Zhang. A measurement-based admission control algorithm for integrated services packet networks. I EEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 5(1):56-70, February 1997.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. 9.Will E. Leland, Murad S. Taqqu, Walter Willinger, and Daniel V. Wilson. On the self-similar nature of Ethernet traffic (extended version). IEEE/A CM Transactions on Networking, 2(1):1- 15, February 1994.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. 10.Abhay K. Parekh and Robert. G. Gallager..4 generalized processor sharing approach to flow control in integrated services networks: The single-node case. IEEE/A CM Transactions on Networking, 1(3):344-357, June 1993.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. 11.Vern Paxson and Sally Floyd. Wide-area traffic: the failure of Poisson modeling, in Proceedings of A CM Sigcomm, pages 257-268, London, United Kingdom, August 1994. ACM.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. 12.S. Shenker, C. Partridge, and R. Guerin. Specification of guaranteed quMity of service. RFC 2212, Internet Engineering Task Force, September 1997.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. 13.S. Shenker and J. Wroclawski. Network element service specification template. Technical Report RFC 2216, Internet Engineering Task Force, September 1997.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. 14.Scott Shenker. Fundamental design issues for the future internet. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, 13(7), September 1995.]]Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. 15.C. Topolcic. Experimental internet stream protocol, version 2 (ST-II). RFC 1190, SRI Network Information Center, October 1990.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. 16.J. Wroclawski. Specification of the controlled-load network element service. RFC 2211, Internet Engineering Task Force, September 1997.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. 17.J. Wroclawski. The use of RSVP with IETF integrated services. Technical Report RFC 2210, Internet Engineering Task Force, September 1997.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. 18.Lixia Zhang, Steve Deering, Deborah Estrin, Scott Shenker, and Daniel Zappala. RSVP: A new resource reservation protocol. IEEE Network Magazine, 7( 5):8-18, September 1993.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Best-effort versus reservations: a simple comparative analysis

              Recommendations

              Comments

              Login options

              Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

              Sign in
              • Published in

                cover image ACM Conferences
                SIGCOMM '98: Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM '98 conference on Applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communication
                October 1998
                328 pages
                ISBN:1581130031
                DOI:10.1145/285237

                Copyright © 1998 ACM

                Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

                Publisher

                Association for Computing Machinery

                New York, NY, United States

                Publication History

                • Published: 1 October 1998

                Permissions

                Request permissions about this article.

                Request Permissions

                Check for updates

                Qualifiers

                • Article

                Acceptance Rates

                SIGCOMM '98 Paper Acceptance Rate26of247submissions,11%Overall Acceptance Rate554of3,547submissions,16%

              PDF Format

              View or Download as a PDF file.

              PDF

              eReader

              View online with eReader.

              eReader