I would like a program for determining the TCP congestion control algorithm used in a captured TCP session.
The referenced Wikipedia article states:
TCP New Reno is the most commonly implemented algorithm, SACK support is very common and is an extension to Reno/New Reno. Most others are competing proposals which still need evaluation. Starting with 2.6.8 the Linux kernel switched the default implementation from reno to BIC. The default implementation was again changed to CUBIC in the 2.6.19 version.
Also:
Compound TCP is a Microsoft implementation of TCP which maintains two different congestion windows simultaneously, with the goal of achieving good performance on LFNs while not impairing fairness. It has been widely deployed with Microsoft Windows Vista and Windows Server 2008 and has been ported to older Microsoft Windows versions as well as Linux.
What would be some strategies for determining which CC algorithm is in use (from a third party capturing the session)?
Update
This project has built a tool to do this:
The Internet has recently been evolving from homogeneous congestion control to heterogeneous congestion control. Several years ago, Internet traffic was mainly controlled by the standard TCP AIMD algorithm, whereas Internet traffic is now controlled by many different TCP congestion control algorithms, such as AIMD, BIC, CUBIC, CTCP, HSTCP, HTCP, HYBLA, ILLINOIS, LP, STCP, VEGAS, VENO, WESTWOOD+, and YEAH. However, there is very little work on the performance and stability study of the Internet with heterogeneous congestion control. One fundamental reason is the lack of the deployment information of different TCP algorithms. The goals of this project are to:
1) develop tools for identifying the TCP algorithms in the Internet, 2) conduct large-scale TCP-algorithm measurements in the Internet.
There are many more congestion control algorithms than you mention here, off the top of my head the list includes: FAST, Scalable, HSTCP, HTCP, Bic, Cubic, Veno, Vegas.
There are also small variations of them due to bug fixes in actual implementations and I’d guess that implementations in different OSes also behave slightly different from one another.
But if I need to try to come up with an idea it would be to estimate the RTT of the connection, you can try to look at the time it took between the third and the fourth packets, as the first and second packets may be tainted by ARPs and other discovery algorithms along the route.
After you have an estimate for RTT you could try to refine it along the way, I’m not exactly sure how you could do that though. But you don’t require a full spec for the program, just ideas 🙂
With the RTT figured out you can try to put the packets into RTT bins and count the number of in flight data packets in each bin. This way you’ll be able to ‘plot’ estimated-cwnd (# of packets in bin) to time and try some pattern matching there.
An alternative would be to go along the trace and try to ‘run’ in your head the different congestion control algorithms and see if the decision at any point matches with the decision you would have done. It will require some leniency and accuracy intervals.
This definitely sounds like an interesting and challenging task!