TCP-LP: Low-Priority Service via End-Point Congestion Control

Main Article Content

P. Swarnalatha
H. Parveen Sultana
M. Pounambal


Transmission Control Protocol-Low Priority (TCP-LP), a algorithm goal is to utilize only the excess network bandwidth as compared to the “fair share†of bandwidth as targeted by TCP. Service prioritization among different traffic classes is an important goal for the Internet. Conventional approaches in solving this problem, considers the existing best-effort class as the low-priority class, and attempt to develop mechanisms that provide “better-than-best-effort†service. We explore the opposite approach, and devise a new distributed algorithm to realize a low-priority service (as compared to the existing best effort) from the network endpoints. To this end, we develop TCP Low Priority (TCP-LP), a distributed algorithm whose goal is to utilize only the excess network bandwidth as compared to the “fair share†of bandwidth as targeted by TCP. The key mechanisms unique to TCP-LP congestion control are the use of one-way packet delays for early congestion indications and a TCP-transparent congestion avoidance policy. The results of our simulation and Internet experiments show that TCP-LP is largely non-intrusive to TCP traffic. Both single and aggregate TCP-LP flows are able to successfully utilize excess network bandwidth; moreover, multiple TCP-LP flows share excess bandwidth fairly. Substantial amounts of excess bandwidth are available to the low-priority class, even in the presence of “greedy†TCP   flows. Despite their low-priority nature, TCP-LP flows are able to utilize significant amounts of available bandwidth in a wide-area network environment.


Download data is not yet available.

Article Details



L. Breslau, E. Knightly, S. Shenker, I. Stoica, and H. Zhang. “Endpoint admission control: Architectural issues and performance. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM ’00, Stockholm, Sweden. Aug 2000.

V. Ribeiro, M. Coates, R. Riedi, S. Sarvotham, B.Hendricks, and R. Baraniuk. Multifractal cross-traffic estimation. In Proceedings of ITC ’00, Monterey, CA. Sep 2000.

]S. Alouf, P. Nain, and D. Towsley. “Inferring network characteristics via moment-based estimatorsâ€. In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM Anchorage, Alaska. April 2001.

S. Yang and G. de Veciana. “Size-based adaptive bandwidth allocation: Optimizing the average QoS for elastic flowsâ€. In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM ’02, New York, NY. June 2002

A. Venkataramani, R. Kokku, and M. Dahlin. TCP Nice: A mechanism for background transfers.In Proceedings of OSDI ’02, Boston, MA. Dec 2002.

A. Bakre and B. R. Badrinath, “I-TCP: Indirect TCP for mobile hosts,†in Proc. 15th Int. Conf. Distributed Computing Systems, Vancouver, BC, Canada, June 1995, pp. 136–143.

S. Floyd, “TCP and explicit congestion notification,â€ACM Comput. Commun. Rev., vol. 24, no. 5, pp. 10– 23, Oct. 1994.

V. D. Park and M. S. Corson, “A highly adaptive distribu ted routing algorithm for mobile wireless networks,†in Proc. IEEE INFOCOM, Kobe, Japan, Apr. 1997, pp. 1405–1413.

J. H. Salim and U. Ahmed, “Performance evaluation of explicit congestion notification (ECN) in IP networks,†RFC 2884, July 2000.

K. K. Ramakrishnan and S. Floyd, “A proposal to add explicit congestion notification (ECN) to IP,â€(Status: Experi mental), Jan. 1999.

R. Yavatkar and N. Bhagawat, “Improving end-to- end performance of TCP over mobile internetworks,†in IEEE Workshop Mobile Computing Systems and Applications, Santa Cruz, CA, Dec. 1994, pp. 146–152.