Experimental study of router buffer sizing

  • Authors:
  • Neda Beheshti;Yashar Ganjali;Monia Ghobadi;Nick McKeown;Geoff Salmon

  • Affiliations:
  • Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA;University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada;University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada;Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA;University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada

  • Venue:
  • Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement
  • Year:
  • 2008

Quantified Score

Hi-index 0.00

Visualization

Abstract

During the past four years, several papers have proposed rules for sizing buffers in Internet core routers. Appenzeller et al. suggest that a link needs a buffer of size O(C/√N), where C is the capacity of the link, and N is the number of flows sharing the link. If correct, buffers could be reduced by 99% in a typical backbone router today without loss in throughput. Enachecsu et al., and Raina et al. suggest that buffers can be reduced even further to 20-50 packets if we are willing to sacrifice a fraction of link capacities, and if there is a large ratio between the speed of core and access links. If correct, this is a five orders of magnitude reduction in buffer sizes. Each proposal is based on theoretical analysis and validated using simulations. Given the potential benefits (and the risk of getting it wrong!) it is worth asking if these results hold in real operational networks. In this paper, we report buffer-sizing experiments performed on real networks - either laboratory networks with commercial routers as well as customized switching and monitoring equipment (UW Madison, Sprint ATL, and University of Toronto), or operational backbone networks (Level 3 Communications backbone network, Internet2, and Stanford). The good news: Subject to the limited scenarios we can create, the buffer sizing results appear to hold. While we are confident that the O(C/√N) will hold quite generally for backbone routers, the 20-50 packet rule should be applied with extra caution to ensure that network components satisfy the underlying assumptions.