Paper detail

Effect of two forms of feedback on the performance of the Rate Control Protocol (RCP)

The Rate Control Protocol (RCP) uses explicit feedback from routers to control network congestion. RCP estimates it's fair rate from two forms of feedback: rate mismatch and queue size. An important design question that remains open in RCP is whether the presence of queue size feedback is helpful, given the presence of feedback from rate mismatch. The feedback from routers to end-systems is time delayed, and may introduce instabilities and complex non-linear dynamics. Delay dynamical systems are often modeled using delay differential equations to facilitate a mathematical analysis of their performance and dynamics. The RCP models with and without queue size feedback give rise to two distinct non-linear delay differential equations. Earlier work on this design question was based on methods of linear systems theory. For further progress, it is quite natural to employ nonlinear techniques. In this study, we approach this design question using tools from control and bifurcation theory. The analytical results reveal that the removal of queue feedback could enhance both stability and convergence properties. Further, using Poincaré normal forms and center manifold theory, we investigate two nonlinear properties, namely, the type of Hopf bifurcation and the asymptotic stability of the bifurcating limit cycles. We show that the presence of queue feedback in the RCP can lead to a sub-critical Hopf bifurcation, which would give rise either to the onset of large amplitude limit cycles or to unstable limit cycles. Whereas, in the absence of queue feedback, the Hopf bifurcation is always super-critical and the bifurcating limit cycles are stable. The analysis is complemented with computations and some packet-level simulations as well. In terms of design, our study suggests that the presence of both forms of feedback may be detrimental to the performance of RCP.

preprint2019arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.