ACM Home Page
Please provide us with feedback. Feedback
Energy consumption of TCP Reno, Newreno, and SACK in multi-hop wireless networks
Full text PdfPdf (260 KB)
Source Joint International Conference on Measurement and Modeling of Computer Systems archive
Proceedings of the 2002 ACM SIGMETRICS international conference on Measurement and modeling of computer systems table of contents
Marina Del Rey, California
SESSION: Networks II table of contents
Pages: 206 - 216  
Year of Publication: 2002
ISBN:1-58113-531-9
Also published in ...
Authors
Harkirat Singh  Portland State University, Portland, OR
Suresh Singh  Portland State University, Portland, OR
Sponsor
SIGMETRICS: ACM Special Interest Group on Measurement and Evaluation
Publisher
ACM  New York, NY, USA
Bibliometrics
Downloads (6 Weeks): 14,   Downloads (12 Months): 49,   Citation Count: 7
Additional Information:

abstract   references   cited by   index terms   collaborative colleagues  

Tools and Actions: Request Permissions Request Permissions    Review this Article  
DOI Bookmark: Use this link to bookmark this Article: http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/511334.511360
What is a DOI?

ABSTRACT

In this paper we compare the energy consumption behavior of three versions of TCP --- Reno, Newreno, and SACK. The experiments were performed on a wireless testbed where we measured the energy consumed at the sender node. Our results indicate that, in most cases, using total energy consumed as the metric, SACK outperforms Newreno and Reno while Newreno performs better than Reno. The experiments emulated a large set of network conditions including variable round trip times, random loss, bursty loss, and packet reordering. We also estimated the idealized energy for each of the three implementations (i.e., we subtract out the energy consumed when the sender is idle) and here, surprisingly, we find that in many instances SACK performs poorly compared to the other two implementations. We conclude that if the mobile device has a very low idle power consumption then SACK is not the best implementation to use for bursty or random loss. On the other hand, if the idle power consumption is significant, then SACK is the best choice since it has the lowest overall energy consumption.


REFERENCES

Note: OCR errors may be found in this Reference List extracted from the full text article. ACM has opted to expose the complete List rather than only correct and linked references.

 
1
NS-2 Network Simulator, http://www.isi.edu/nsnam/ns/ (October 15, 2001).
 
2
Simplepower, http://www.cse.psu.edu/mdl/SimplePower.html (October 15, 2001).
 
3
OpenBsd2.9, http://daedalus.cs.berkeley.edu (August, 2001).
 
4
Mark Allman, Chris Hayes, Hans Kruse, and Shawn Ostermann, "TCP Performance Over Satellite Links", In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Telecommunication Systems, March 1997.
 
5
6
7
8
 
9
Laura Feeny and Martin Nilsson, "Investigating the Energy Consumption of a Wireless Network Interface in an Ad Hoc Networking Environment", Proceedings INFOCOM 2001, Anchorage, Alaska.
 
10
Tim Henderson, Randy Katz, "Transport Protocols for Internet-compatible Satellite networks", IEEE Journal on Selected Areas of Communications, February, 1999.
11
12
 
13
L. Rizzo, "Issues in the Implementation of Selective Acknowledgments for TCP", January, 1996, http://www.iet.unipi.it/luigi/selack.ps
 
14
V. Rodoplu and T. H. Meng, "Minimum Energy Mobile Wireless Networks," IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications, vol. 17, pp. 1333-1344, August 1999.
 
15
 
16
 
17
 
18
M. Zorzi, R. R. Rao, "Is TCP Energy Efficient?," Proceedings IEEE MoMuC, November 1999.

CITED BY  7

Collaborative Colleagues:
Harkirat Singh: colleagues
Suresh Singh: colleagues