Transport Working Group P. Heist Internet-Draft R.W. Grimes Intended status: Informational J. Morton Expires: 4 January 2020 3 July 2019 Some Congestion Experienced One and Two-Flow Tests draft-heist-tsvwg-sce-one-and-two-flow-tests-00 Abstract This note presents one and two-flow test results for the SCE (Some Congestion Experienced) reference implementation. These tests are not intended to be a comprehensive real-world evaluation of SCE, but an illustration of SCE's influence on basic TCP metrics in a controlled environment. Status of This Memo This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." This Internet-Draft will expire on 4 January 2020. Copyright Notice Copyright (c) 2019 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/ license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 1] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 Table of Contents 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 2. Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3. Test Tools and Environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 4. Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. Results and Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5.1. One-Flow Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5.1.1. Reno-SCE TCP Throughput . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 5.1.2. Reno-SCE TCP RTT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 5.1.3. DCTCP-SCE TCP Throughput . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 5.1.4. DCTCP-SCE TCP RTT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5.2. Two-Flow Tests . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.2.1. Single Queue (Cake "flowblind") . . . . . . . . . . . 9 5.2.2. Single Queue (Cake "sce-single") . . . . . . . . . . 11 5.2.3. Fair Queue (Cake "triple-isolate") . . . . . . . . . 13 6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 7. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 8. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 9. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Appendix A. Appendix (Raw Results Tables) . . . . . . . . . . . 15 A.1. One-Flow TCP Throughput . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16 A.2. One-Flow TCP RTT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18 A.3. Two-Flow TCP Throughput (Cake "flowblind") . . . . . . . 21 A.4. Two-Flow TCP Throughput (Cake "flowblind sce-single") . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28 A.5. Two-Flow TCP Throughput (Cake "triple-isolate") . . . . . 36 A.6. Two-Flow TCP RTT (Cake "flowblind") . . . . . . . . . . . 43 A.7. Two-Flow TCP RTT (Cake "flowblind sce-single") . . . . . 50 A.8. Two-Flow TCP RTT (Cake "triple-isolate") . . . . . . . . 58 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65 1. Introduction SCE provides early and proportional feedback to the CC (congestion control) algorithms for transport protocols, including but not limited to TCP. The [sce-repo] is a Linux kernel modified to support SCE, including: * Enhancements to Linux's Cake (Common Applications Kept Enhanced) AQM to support SCE signaling * Modifications to the TCP receive path to reflect SCE signals back to the sender * The addition of three new TCP CC algorithms that modify the originals to add SCE support: Reno-SCE, DCTCP-SCE and Cubic-SCE (work in progress as of this writing) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 2] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 In this note we run one and two-flow TCP tests across a range of simulated path bandwidths and RTTs. One-flow tests measure SCE's impact on TCP throughput and TCP RTT. Two-flow tests evaluate fairness between and among several SCE and non-SCE TCP implementations, while making several adjustments to Cake's SCE and fair queueing parameters. It is recognized that these tests do not simulate real-world conditions, and will not be an indication of how SCE will perform in all situations. However, they serve as fundamental tests for the SCE reference implementation. Once the behavior in these tests is well understood and theory and experiment are in agreement, additional complexity can be added to the test procedures with the confidence that the reference implementation's fundamentals are sound. 2. Terminology The following terminology is used in this document: * Path Bandwidth or Cake-limited Bandwidth: The available bandwidth between the sender and receiver, as controlled by Cake on the middlebox, and set by Cake's bandwidth parameter. * Path RTT or just RTT (in context): The approximate minimum round- trip time of packets that go from the sender to receiver and back when the path is unloaded. * Netem bi-directional delay: The total path RTT added by netem in both directions. * TCP throughput and TCP RTT: Well-known terms that apply specifically to the flows under test. 3. Test Tools and Environment The [Flent] tool is used for all tests. Flent uses netperf for its TCP tests, and allows for test batches, plotting, the recording of results and the collection of metadata in JSON format [RFC8259]. Flent both captures the measured TCP throughput from netperf, and simultaneously uses the [ss] tool in Linux to passively monitor TCP RTT. All tests are performed using a three node dumbbell topology: +--------+ +-----------+ +----------+ | Sender |--------------| Middlebox |--------------| Receiver | +--------+ +-----------+ +----------+ Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 3] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 Figure 1: Test topology * Sender: Runs Flent and sends data to the receiver * Middlebox: - Acts as a router between the sender and receiver - Runs Cake on egress of both interfaces for queue management and SCE signaling - Runs netem on the ingress of both interfaces for delay simulation, splitting the total delay in half for each interface * Receiver: Receives data from and reflects SCE signals back to the sender via the ESCE (Echo Some Congestion Experienced) bit All nodes run the SCE reference implementation kernel as of commit 56915a82 (2019-06-20), and are connected directly via Gigabit Ethernet. 4. Tests The tests are implemented with a Flent batch file to drive netperf and re-configure Cake and netem on the middlebox with various parameters. Scripts post-process the results and create csv and markdown tables for external use, including by this document. Unless otherwise mentioned, measurements are obtained from TCP flows from start to finish, not at steady state. This allows for some discussion of the differences in TCP CC algorithm behavior during slow start and congestion avoidance. Typically, each test is run long enough to obtain a reasonable approximation of steady state throughput, but in a few high BDP cases slow start accounts for a significant portion of the test length. When relevant to the analysis of the results, this is stated in the text. 5. Results and Analysis 5.1. One-Flow Tests The goal of the one-flow tests is to analyze the impact of SCE on the TCP throughput and TCP RTT of single TCP flows across a range of simulated path bandwidths and RTTs. What follows is an analysis of the results. See Section a.1 and Section a.2 for the raw results for TCP throughput and TCP RTT, respectively. Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 4] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 5.1.1. Reno-SCE TCP Throughput The following table shows the difference in TCP throughput for Reno- SCE vs Reno across the tested range of simulated path bandwidths and RTTs: +---+-----+------+------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | | 0| 2| 5| 10| 20 | 40 | 80 | 160 | +===+=====+======+======+=======+========+========+========+========+ |0.5|0.000| 0.000| 0.000| 0.000| 0.000 | -0.100 | -0.180 | -0.160 | +---+-----+------+------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |1 |0.000| 0.000| 0.000| 0.000| -0.110 | -0.210 | -0.280 | -0.280 | +---+-----+------+------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |2 |0.000| 0.000|-0.010| -0.120| -0.210 | -0.375 | -0.370 | -0.405 | +---+-----+------+------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |5 |0.000|-0.052|-0.142| -0.228| -0.178 | -0.032 | -0.006 | 0.016 | +---+-----+------+------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |10 |0.000|-0.071|-0.139| -0.143| -0.046 | 0.062 | 0.116 | 0.168 | +---+-----+------+------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |25 |0.000|-0.003|-0.006| 0.010| 0.073 | 0.143 | 0.196 | 0.259 | +---+-----+------+------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |50 |0.000| 0.000| 0.001| 0.029| 0.102 | 0.169 | 0.235 | 0.272 | +---+-----+------+------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |100|0.000| 0.000| 0.004| 0.043| 0.103 | 0.215 | 0.238 | 0.289 | +---+-----+------+------+-------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ Table 1: Difference in TCP Throughput (reno-sce - reno), normalized to Cake- limited Bandwidth; Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) From the above TCP throughput differences we can observe: 1. Improved utilization for SCE at sufficiently high BDPs. This is due to SCE's proportional congestion signals, which can significantly reduce the classic Reno throughput sawtooth by making drops or CE marks rare to non-existent. The utilization improvement increases with BDP largely because the TCP window recovery time after a drop or CE mark increases with BDP, deepening the sawtooth. 2. Significant under-utilization at bandwidths <= 10Mbit, which tends to worsen as path RTT increases. Investigation is underway as to the source of this. These drops in utilization are however also accompanied by drops in TCP RTT (see below). Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 5] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 5.1.2. Reno-SCE TCP RTT The following table shows the difference in TCP RTT for Reno-SCE vs Reno across the tested range of simulated path bandwidths and RTTs: +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | | 0| 2| 5| 10| 20 | 40 | 80 | 160 | +===+======+======+======+======+========+========+========+========+ |0.5|-88.41|-87.51|-88.43|-88.59| -62.37 | -52.56 | -42.23 | -31.93 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |1 |-42.30|-41.94|-42.65|-33.03| -32.92 | -27.92 | -19.13 | -13.20 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |2 |-29.09|-27.67|-22.19|-19.23| -14.54 | -10.12 | -3.66 | -1.50 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |5 | -9.18| -9.47| -7.51| -8.37| -5.63 | -3.49 | -1.69 | -1.24 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |10 | -2.46| -2.75| -2.95| -3.91| -2.44 | -1.42 | -0.54 | -0.41 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |25 | -1.87| -2.09| -2.53| -1.74| -0.42 | 0.01 | 0.19 | -0.01 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |50 | -2.00| -2.18| -1.48| -0.31| 0.59 | 0.98 | 0.86 | 0.57 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |100| -1.87| -1.67| -1.04| 0.06| 0.95 | 1.42 | 1.41 | 1.15 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ Table 2: Difference in TCP RTT (reno-sce - reno); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) From the above TCP RTT differences we can observe: 1. Significant reductions in TCP RTT for Reno-SCE at most BDPs. SCE's proportional congestion signals are aiding the sender in managing queue lengths. 2. Greater reductions in TCP RTT at lower path bandwidths and RTTs. This is because Reno-linear growth becomes relatively larger as the path bandwidth decreases. This results in greater queue growth in the interval before AQM activates, and a subsequently longer drain time after congestion is signaled. 3. A slight increase in TCP RTT for SCE at high BDPs. This has been observed to have a possible connection to the ESCE (Echo Some Congestion Experienced) feedback strategy implemented in on the TCP receive side. Research and optimization in this area is ongoing. Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 6] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 5.1.3. DCTCP-SCE TCP Throughput The following table shows the difference in TCP throughput for DCTCP- SCE vs DCTCP across the tested range of simulated path bandwidths and RTTs: +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | | 0| 2| 5| 10| 20 | 40 | 80 | 160 | +===+======+======+======+======+========+========+========+========+ |0.5| 0.000| 0.000| 0.000| 0.000| 0.000 | -0.120 | -0.220 | -0.400 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |1 | 0.000| 0.000| 0.000| 0.000| -0.120 | -0.260 | -0.420 | -0.570 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |2 | 0.000| 0.000|-0.015|-0.130| -0.285 | -0.505 | -0.565 | -0.705 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |5 | 0.000|-0.038|-0.150|-0.270| -0.374 | -0.588 | -0.652 | -0.620 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |10 | 0.000|-0.087|-0.197|-0.265| -0.266 | -0.257 | -0.271 | -0.134 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |25 |-0.006|-0.060|-0.131|-0.167| -0.154 | -0.133 | -0.067 | 0.110 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |50 | 0.000|-0.001|-0.006|-0.008| 0.005 | 0.012 | 0.143 | 0.180 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |100| 0.000| 0.007| 0.018| 0.031| 0.040 | 0.087 | 0.151 | 0.246 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ Table 3: Difference in TCP Throughput (dctcp-sce - dctcp), normalized to Cake- limited Bandwidth; Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) From the above TCP throughput differences we can observe: 1. Improved utilization for SCE at higher BDPs. At first glance we might assume that this is due to SCE's feedback signals improving upon DCTCP's window recovery time, as with Reno, but another significant part of this increase is due to DCTCP-SCE's steeper ramp during slow start, and a test length that is short relative to the time spent in slow start. The test is 300 seconds long, and at a path bandwidth of 100Mbit and RTT of 160ms, DCTCP takes a full 225 seconds to ramp up to the BDP, while DCTCP-SCE, with its steeper ramp, takes only 80 seconds. That said, steady state throughput at this BDP is around 87Mbit for DCTCP, and around 96Mbit for DCTCP-SCE, an increase of around 10%, so the proportional congestion control signals also play a part in increasing utilization. 2. Significant under-utilization at bandwidths <= 25Mbit, which tends to worsen as path RTT increases. Investigation is underway Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 7] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 as to the source of this. These drops in utilization are however also accompanied by drops in TCP RTT (see below). 5.1.4. DCTCP-SCE TCP RTT The following table shows the difference in TCP RTT for DCTCP-SCE vs DCTCP across the tested range of simulated path bandwidths and RTTs: +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | | 0| 2| 5| 10| 20 | 40 | 80 | 160 | +===+======+======+======+======+========+========+========+========+ |0.5|-82.57|-81.21|-81.37|-81.53| -60.53 | -70.29 | -74.76 | -54.33 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |1 |-41.78|-42.31|-40.43|-30.98| -35.26 | -39.27 | -29.95 | -15.62 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |2 |-21.94|-20.29|-20.86|-17.58| -19.93 | -12.70 | -7.37 | -3.97 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |5 | -6.65| -7.27| -7.08| -6.45| -5.57 | -3.59 | -2.19 | -1.31 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |10 | -1.85| -2.11| -2.85| -2.25| -2.16 | -1.51 | -1.28 | -1.12 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |25 | -2.47| -2.52| -2.94| -3.13| -2.93 | -1.63 | -0.98 | -0.78 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |50 | -2.63| -3.15| -2.99| -3.12| -3.37 | -3.57 | -0.81 | -0.63 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |100| -2.79| -2.81| -2.82| -3.01| -3.26 | -2.52 | -0.14 | 0.02 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ Table 4: Difference in TCP RTT (dctcp-sce - dctcp); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) From the above TCP RTT differences we can observe: 1. A nearly across the board reduction in TCP RTT for DCTCP-SCE. SCE's proportional congestion signals are aiding the sender in managing queue lengths. 2. Greater reductions in TCP RTT at lower bandwidths and path RTTs. See Section 5.1.2 for an explanation of this. 3. A slight increase in TCP RTT for DCTCP-SCE at 100Mbit / 160ms. See Section 5.1.2 for a likely explanation of this. Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 8] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 5.2. Two-Flow Tests The goal of the two-flow tests is to measure fairness between and among SCE and non-SCE TCP flows, through either a single queue or with fair queueing. What follows is a partial analysis of the results, and see Section a.3 through Section a.8 for the raw results tables. 5.2.1. Single Queue (Cake "flowblind") Cake's flowblind parameter disables fair queueing, so that Cake uses only a single queue. This can be used to evaluate single-queue throughput fairness between SCE and non-SCE flows. 5.2.1.1. Reno vs Reno It might be useful to remind ourselves that competition between two (or more) flows of the same TCP CC algorithm is usually designed to yield a high degree of throughput fairness in a single queue. Looking at Jain's fairness index [RFC5166] for two flows across a range of simulated path bandwidths and RTTs shows this to be true for two TCP Reno flows, for example: +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +=====+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | 1 | 0.993 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.998 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 5 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.998 | 0.998 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 10 | 1.000 | 0.999 | 0.998 | 1.000 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 50 | 1.000 | 0.998 | 0.999 | 0.999 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 100 | 0.998 | 0.999 | 0.999 | 1.000 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 5: reno vs reno Jain's fairness index; Columns: netem bi- dir Delay (ms); Rows: Cake Bandwidth (Mbit) 5.2.1.2. Reno vs Reno-SCE Now, we do a comparison of Reno vs Reno-SCE in a single queue, while still using Cake's default SCE signaling ramp: Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 9] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +=====+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | 1 | 0.969 | 0.969 | 0.915 | 0.821 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 5 | 0.958 | 0.824 | 0.714 | 0.632 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 10 | 0.959 | 0.719 | 0.669 | 0.698 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 50 | 0.608 | 0.621 | 0.673 | 0.907 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 100 | 0.560 | 0.627 | 0.668 | 0.782 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 6: reno vs reno-sce Jain's fairness index; Columns: netem bi- dir Delay (ms); Rows: Cake Bandwidth (Mbit) From the above Jain's fairness index numbers we can observe that while there can be reasonable fairness at very low BDPs, and while there is no starvation, fairness degrades quickly at higher throughputs and RTTs. This is due to the Cake's default SCE signaling ramp being tuned to provide an early signal of congestion, to avoid CE marks and packet drops. As a result, SCE enabled flows back off in the face of competition, whereas non-SCE flows fill the queue until a drop or CE mark occurs. 5.2.1.3. Cubic vs DCTCP-SCE Of particular interest to the congestion control community is competition between the commonly used TCP Cubic algorithm and DCTCP- SCE. It is a well-established fact that classic DCTCP will typically out-compete Cubic in a single queue. It would be valuable if there were a way to improve that fairness with SCE. When comparing Cubic vs DCTCP-SCE using Cake's default SCE signaling ramp, we can see that while there is no starvation, fairness does degrade fairly rapidly as BDP increases: Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 10] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +=====+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | 1 | 0.979 | 0.976 | 0.922 | 0.821 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 5 | 0.977 | 0.797 | 0.708 | 0.604 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 10 | 0.979 | 0.693 | 0.645 | 0.627 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 50 | 0.599 | 0.570 | 0.586 | 0.607 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 100 | 0.547 | 0.552 | 0.563 | 0.599 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 7: cubic vs dctcp-sce Jain's fairness index; Columns: netem bi- dir Delay (ms); Rows: Cake Bandwidth (Mbit) As of today, SCE by default does not lead to fairness at all BDPs between SCE and non-SCE flows. However, efforts are ongoing to improve this, and as we can see in Section 5.2.2, Cake's signaling ramp can be tuned to improve this fairness. 5.2.2. Single Queue (Cake "sce-single") As we saw in Section 5.2.1, there is room to improve SCE vs non-SCE fairness in a single queue. One way to do this is to change the SCE signaling ramp to reduce or delay SCE signals until closer to the point where CE signals occur. This is the motivation behind the sce- single and sce-thresh Cake parameters. By default, Cake begins proportionally signaling SCE when a packet's sojourn time in the queue is greater than half the CoDel target, and reaches 100% SCE signaling when the sojourn time is greater than or equal to the CoDel target. The sce-single parameter delays the start of the ramp until the sojourn reaches the CoDel target itself, while keeping the ramp slope the same. The sce-thresh parameter, while not evaluated here, allows an intermediate ramp between the default and sce-single, using values from 2-1024, with sce-thresh set to 8 yielding a ramp that's halfway in-between. It is expected that the result of signaling SCE later is a subsequent increase in TCP RTT, including for single flows. Thus, the adjustment of the SCE signaling ramp is a tradeoff between the increased utilization and reduced TCP RTT possible with SCE, and fairness with non-SCE flows in a single queue. By using sce-single, Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 11] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 we can show the maximum fairness that can be achieved by tuning the SCE signaling ramp in this way. 5.2.2.1. Reno vs Reno-SCE Revisiting the Reno vs Reno-SCE comparison that we did in Section 5.2.1.2, we now run the same test with Cake's sce-single parameter set: +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +=====+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | 1 | 1.000 | 0.998 | 1.000 | 0.987 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 5 | 0.997 | 0.952 | 0.785 | 0.819 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 10 | 0.997 | 0.950 | 0.790 | 0.994 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 50 | 1.000 | 0.986 | 0.980 | 0.977 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 100 | 0.988 | 0.901 | 0.932 | 0.987 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 8: reno vs reno-sce Jain's fairness index; Columns: netem bi- dir Delay (ms); Rows: Cake Bandwidth (Mbit) We can see that single queue fairness has improved considerably. While there are results at a few bandwidth-delay combinations that are still under investigation, single queue fairness between Reno and Reno-SCE has largely been achieved. 5.2.2.2. Cubic vs DCTCP-SCE Revisiting the Cubic vs DCTCP-SCE comparison that we did in Section 5.2.1.3, we now run the same test with Cake's sce-single parameter set: Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 12] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +=====+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | 1 | 0.993 | 0.999 | 0.995 | 0.963 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 5 | 1.000 | 0.898 | 0.765 | 0.741 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 10 | 0.975 | 0.893 | 0.733 | 0.885 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 50 | 0.999 | 0.752 | 0.799 | 0.923 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 100 | 0.944 | 0.714 | 0.661 | 0.650 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 9: cubic vs dctcp-sce Jain's fairness index; Columns: netem bi- dir Delay (ms); Rows: Cake Bandwidth (Mbit) While it can be seen that there is an almost across the board improvement vs Cake's default SCE ramp, there are still bandwidth- delay combinations that do not yield a sufficient level of fairness in a single queue. Work is ongoing to improve this. 5.2.3. Fair Queue (Cake "triple-isolate") Cake's default triple-isolate fairness mode provides fairness among flows and a combination of source and destination IP addresses. For our purposes, this will effectively serve as fair queueing among flows, as we are only using one IP on each of the source and destination hosts. With fair queueing, we expect to achieve a high level of throughput fairness at most bandwidth-delay combinations. 5.2.3.1. Cubic vs DCTCP-SCE Revisiting the Cubic vs DCTCP-SCE comparisons that we did in Section 5.2.1.3 and Section 5.2.2.2, we now run the same test with Cake's fair queueing enabled via triple-isolate: Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 13] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +=====+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | 1 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.916 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 5 | 1.000 | 0.980 | 0.931 | 0.698 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 10 | 1.000 | 0.946 | 0.896 | 0.722 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 50 | 1.000 | 0.978 | 0.977 | 1.000 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 100 | 1.000 | 0.999 | 1.000 | 1.000 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 10: cubic vs dctcp-sce Jain's fairness index; Columns: netem bi- dir Delay (ms); Rows: Cake Bandwidth (Mbit) With fair queueing, fairness is achieved for a broad range of bandwidth-delay combinations. We do see a consistent and narrow deviation at around 160ms between 5 and 10Mbit, which happens in competition between SCE and non-SCE flows, regardless of the exact algorithms in use. The cause of this will be investigated. 5.2.3.2. DCTCP vs DCTCP-SCE As another example of SCE vs non-SCE competition with fair queueing enabled, here we compare DCTCP vs DCTCP-SCE: +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +=====+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | 1 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 1.000 | 0.900 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 5 | 1.000 | 0.973 | 0.925 | 0.661 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 10 | 1.000 | 0.950 | 0.901 | 0.739 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 50 | 1.000 | 0.976 | 0.978 | 1.000 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | 100 | 1.000 | 0.999 | 0.999 | 0.999 | +-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 11: dctcp vs dctcp-sce Jain's fairness index; Columns: netem bi- dir Delay (ms); Rows: Cake Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 14] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 As with Cubic vs DCTCP-SCE, a high degree of fairness is achieved for most bandwidth-delay combinations, yet we do see the same small gap in fairness at around 160ms between 5 and 10Mbit as we see with Cubic vs DCTCP-SCE and other SCE vs non-SCE flow tests with fair queueing. It is expected that further investigation into this will lead to a solution. 6. Security Considerations There are no known security considerations introduced by this note. 7. IANA Considerations This document has no IANA actions. 8. Acknowledgments Many thanks go out to Toke Hoiland-Jorgensen for making several key changes to the Flent tool. 9. Informative References [Flent] "The FLExible Network Tester Home Page", July 2019, . [RFC5166] Floyd, S., Ed., "Metrics for the Evaluation of Congestion Control Mechanisms", RFC 5166, DOI 10.17487/RFC5166, March 2008, . [RFC8259] Bray, T., Ed., "The JavaScript Object Notation (JSON) Data Interchange Format", STD 90, RFC 8259, DOI 10.17487/RFC8259, December 2017, . [sce-repo] "Some Congestion Experienced Reference Implementation GitHub Repository", July 2019, . [ss] "ss man page", July 2019, . Appendix A. Appendix (Raw Results Tables) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 15] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 A.1. One-Flow TCP Throughput +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 2 | 5 | 10 | 20 | 40 | 80 | 160 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ |0.5| 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.47 | 0.48 | 0.44 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.95 | 0.94 | 0.87 | 0.82 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |2 | 1.91 | 1.91 | 1.91 | 1.91 | 1.91 | 1.83 | 1.82 | 1.52 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 4.78 | 4.78 | 4.78 | 4.78 | 4.76 | 4.57 | 4.32 | 3.28 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 9.56 | 9.56 | 9.56 | 9.55 | 9.43 | 8.85 | 8.23 | 6.51 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |25 | 23.91 | 23.91 | 23.89 | 23.82 | 23.17 | 22.13 | 20.83 | 16.07 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 47.81 | 47.80 | 47.71 | 47.43 | 45.87 | 44.12 | 40.44 | 31.64 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 95.64 | 95.50 | 95.17 | 94.39 | 92.52 | 87.73 | 77.25 | 82.38 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 12: cubic Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 2 | 5 | 10 | 20 | 40 | 80 | 160 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ |0.5| 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.47 | 0.45 | 0.40 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.95 | 0.94 | 0.89 | 0.82 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |2 | 1.91 | 1.91 | 1.91 | 1.90 | 1.84 | 1.85 | 1.64 | 1.54 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 4.78 | 4.78 | 4.78 | 4.78 | 4.64 | 3.91 | 3.88 | 3.29 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 9.56 | 9.56 | 9.56 | 9.52 | 8.90 | 8.04 | 7.44 | 6.43 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |25 | 23.91 | 23.91 | 23.89 | 23.38 | 21.65 | 19.51 | 17.63 | 14.50 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 47.82 | 47.81 | 47.74 | 46.21 | 42.17 | 38.31 | 31.97 | 28.85 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 95.63 | 95.53 | 94.91 | 90.65 | 83.51 | 69.92 | 63.70 | 53.89 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 13: reno Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 16] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 2 | 5 | 10 | 20 | 40 | 80 | 160 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ |0.5| 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.42 | 0.36 | 0.32 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.84 | 0.73 | 0.61 | 0.54 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |2 | 1.91 | 1.91 | 1.89 | 1.66 | 1.42 | 1.10 | 0.90 | 0.73 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 4.78 | 4.52 | 4.07 | 3.64 | 3.75 | 3.75 | 3.85 | 3.37 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 9.56 | 8.85 | 8.17 | 8.09 | 8.44 | 8.66 | 8.60 | 8.11 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |25 | 23.90 | 23.84 | 23.74 | 23.62 | 23.47 | 23.09 | 22.54 | 20.97 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 47.81 | 47.81 | 47.78 | 47.66 | 47.25 | 46.74 | 43.70 | 42.44 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 95.64 | 95.58 | 95.30 | 94.98 | 93.82 | 91.37 | 87.46 | 82.83 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 14: reno-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 2 | 5 | 10 | 20 | 40 | 80 | 160 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ |0.5| 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.47 | 0.47 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.95 | 0.93 | 0.91 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |2 | 1.91 | 1.91 | 1.91 | 1.91 | 1.91 | 1.88 | 1.78 | 1.78 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 4.78 | 4.78 | 4.78 | 4.77 | 4.74 | 4.68 | 4.54 | 4.10 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 9.56 | 9.56 | 9.55 | 9.52 | 9.41 | 9.23 | 8.86 | 7.23 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |25 | 23.91 | 23.90 | 23.84 | 23.68 | 23.25 | 22.34 | 20.33 | 15.86 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 47.82 | 47.75 | 47.55 | 46.96 | 45.33 | 43.93 | 34.63 | 31.54 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 95.62 | 94.89 | 93.59 | 91.78 | 90.26 | 81.84 | 70.42 | 57.89 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 15: dctcp Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 17] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 2 | 5 | 10 | 20 | 40 | 80 | 160 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ |0.5| 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.42 | 0.36 | 0.27 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.96 | 0.84 | 0.69 | 0.51 | 0.34 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |2 | 1.91 | 1.91 | 1.88 | 1.65 | 1.34 | 0.87 | 0.65 | 0.37 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 4.78 | 4.59 | 4.03 | 3.42 | 2.87 | 1.74 | 1.28 | 1.00 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 9.56 | 8.69 | 7.58 | 6.87 | 6.75 | 6.66 | 6.15 | 5.89 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |25 | 23.75 | 22.39 | 20.56 | 19.51 | 19.39 | 19.02 | 18.66 | 18.62 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 47.81 | 47.68 | 47.27 | 46.54 | 45.59 | 44.52 | 41.77 | 40.53 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 95.64 | 95.59 | 95.34 | 94.90 | 94.30 | 90.53 | 85.48 | 82.53 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 16: dctcp-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) A.2. One-Flow TCP RTT +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | |0 |2 |5 |10 | 20 | 40 | 80 | 160 | +===+======+======+======+======+========+========+========+========+ |0.5|121.38|120.07|119.91|121.37| 108.48 | 128.70 | 189.50 | 230.34 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |1 |68.40 |68.16 |68.10 |69.33 | 72.97 | 88.11 | 116.66 | 191.18 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |2 |34.80 |35.01 |40.33 |40.17 | 52.74 | 62.05 | 100.71 | 175.00 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |5 |13.79 |15.92 |18.43 |23.83 | 31.04 | 49.07 | 87.79 | 167.49 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |10 |7.08 |8.95 |12.58 |17.39 | 26.12 | 44.73 | 84.60 | 164.49 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |25 |6.36 |8.29 |11.31 |15.33 | 24.06 | 43.37 | 82.68 | 162.72 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |50 |5.88 |8.16 |10.70 |14.76 | 23.51 | 42.82 | 82.10 | 161.81 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |100|5.99 |8.08 |10.38 |14.42 | 23.69 | 42.90 | 82.16 | 162.01 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ Table 17: cubic Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 18] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | |0 |2 |5 |10 | 20 | 40 | 80 | 160 | +===+======+======+======+======+========+========+========+========+ |0.5|138.77|137.84|138.91|138.92| 132.94 | 140.51 | 170.48 | 235.32 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |1 |66.82 |66.68 |68.93 |69.02 | 77.11 | 91.69 | 123.15 | 196.59 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |2 |41.00 |41.25 |40.81 |42.24 | 47.24 | 65.51 | 99.34 | 176.74 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |5 |16.25 |18.37 |19.18 |25.13 | 32.06 | 49.61 | 87.61 | 167.39 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |10 |7.68 |9.86 |13.14 |18.75 | 26.74 | 45.54 | 84.50 | 164.45 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |25 |6.27 |8.26 |11.46 |15.22 | 23.65 | 42.84 | 82.59 | 162.69 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |50 |5.99 |8.08 |10.34 |14.11 | 22.86 | 42.22 | 81.97 | 162.08 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |100|5.87 |7.64 |9.85 |13.62 | 22.64 | 41.96 | 81.73 | 161.76 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ Table 18: reno Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+ | |0 | 2 | 5 | 10 | 20 | 40 | 80 | 160 | +===+=====+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+========+========+ |0.5|50.36| 50.33 | 50.48 | 50.33 | 70.57 | 87.95 | 128.25 | 203.39 | +---+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+ |1 |24.52| 24.74 | 26.28 | 35.99 | 44.19 | 63.77 | 104.02 | 183.39 | +---+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+ |2 |11.91| 13.58 | 18.62 | 23.01 | 32.70 | 55.39 | 95.68 | 175.24 | +---+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+ |5 |7.07 | 8.90 | 11.67 | 16.76 | 26.43 | 46.12 | 85.92 | 166.15 | +---+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+ |10 |5.22 | 7.11 | 10.19 | 14.84 | 24.30 | 44.12 | 83.96 | 164.04 | +---+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+ |25 |4.40 | 6.17 | 8.93 | 13.48 | 23.23 | 42.85 | 82.78 | 162.68 | +---+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+ |50 |3.99 | 5.90 | 8.86 | 13.80 | 23.45 | 43.20 | 82.83 | 162.65 | +---+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+ |100|4.00 | 5.97 | 8.81 | 13.68 | 23.59 | 43.38 | 83.14 | 162.91 | +---+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+ Table 19: reno-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 19] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ | |0 |2 |5 |10 | 20 | 40 | 80 | 160 | +===+======+======+======+======+========+========+========+========+ |0.5|132.20|131.17|131.14|130.92| 130.17 | 157.56 | 199.65 | 260.24 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |1 |66.23 |66.69 |66.65 |66.60 | 79.38 | 103.86 | 135.31 | 203.32 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |2 |33.84 |34.07 |39.03 |40.24 | 52.76 | 69.25 | 104.09 | 183.85 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |5 |13.67 |15.87 |18.50 |23.05 | 32.73 | 53.12 | 89.63 | 168.33 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |10 |6.99 |9.06 |12.82 |17.26 | 26.75 | 45.79 | 85.43 | 165.10 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |25 |6.57 |8.26 |11.25 |16.07 | 25.65 | 44.11 | 83.45 | 163.30 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |50 |6.22 |8.39 |10.98 |15.83 | 25.65 | 45.56 | 82.73 | 162.51 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ |100|6.31 |8.27 |11.16 |16.12 | 25.88 | 44.90 | 82.43 | 162.05 | +---+------+------+------+------+--------+--------+--------+--------+ Table 20: dctcp Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+ | |0 | 2 | 5 | 10 | 20 | 40 | 80 | 160 | +===+=====+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+========+========+ |0.5|49.63| 49.96 | 49.77 | 49.39 | 69.64 | 87.27 | 124.89 | 205.91 | +---+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+ |1 |24.45| 24.38 | 26.22 | 35.62 | 44.12 | 64.59 | 105.36 | 187.70 | +---+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+ |2 |11.90| 13.78 | 18.17 | 22.66 | 32.83 | 56.55 | 96.72 | 179.88 | +---+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+ |5 |7.02 | 8.60 | 11.42 | 16.60 | 27.16 | 49.53 | 90.11 | 170.64 | +---+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+ |10 |5.14 | 6.95 | 9.97 | 15.01 | 24.59 | 44.28 | 84.15 | 163.98 | +---+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+ |25 |4.10 | 5.74 | 8.31 | 12.94 | 22.72 | 42.48 | 82.47 | 162.52 | +---+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+ |50 |3.59 | 5.24 | 7.99 | 12.71 | 22.28 | 41.99 | 81.92 | 161.88 | +---+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+ |100|3.52 | 5.46 | 8.34 | 13.11 | 22.62 | 42.38 | 82.29 | 162.07 | +---+-----+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+--------+--------+ Table 21: dctcp-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 20] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 A.3. Two-Flow TCP Throughput (Cake "flowblind") +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | cubic | | | | cubic | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.46 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.47 | 0.46 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.41 | 2.39 | 2.37 | 2.27 | 2.37 | 2.38 | 2.37 | 2.19 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.82 | 4.57 | 4.70 | 3.83 | 4.74 | 4.93 | 4.77 | 4.83 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 22.64 | 23.46 | 24.09 | 22.26 | 25.18 | 24.19 | 23.07 | 20.68 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 47.66 | 42.88 | 46.29 | 44.10 | 48.01 | 52.03 | 48.29 | 43.72 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 22: cubic-cubic Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | cubic | | | | reno | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.43 | 0.46 | 0.45 | 0.41 | 0.53 | 0.50 | 0.51 | 0.51 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.10 | 2.04 | 2.46 | 2.30 | 2.68 | 2.71 | 2.22 | 2.04 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.23 | 4.61 | 4.50 | 4.16 | 5.34 | 4.81 | 4.83 | 4.17 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 22.79 | 24.60 | 23.55 | 26.18 | 25.03 | 23.05 | 23.32 | 14.70 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 46.82 | 51.06 | 48.73 | 55.96 | 48.83 | 43.85 | 44.96 | 29.02 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 23: cubic-reno Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 21] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+----------+-----+------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+==========+=====+======+=======+ | | cubic | | | | reno-sce | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+----------+-----+------+-------+ |1 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.62 | 0.66 | 0.41 | 0.41| 0.34 | 0.24 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+----------+-----+------+-------+ |5 | 2.75 | 3.63 | 3.96 | 3.92 | 2.03 | 1.14| 0.80 | 0.46 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+----------+-----+------+-------+ |10 | 5.50 | 7.97 | 8.24 | 7.57 | 4.06 | 1.57| 1.26 | 1.37 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+----------+-----+------+-------+ |50 | 43.53 | 44.29 | 42.98 | 39.36 | 4.30 | 3.44| 4.25 | 4.89 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+----------+-----+------+-------+ |100| 91.16 | 89.89 | 88.69 | 76.76 | 4.46 | 5.28| 5.77 | 11.79 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+----------+-----+------+-------+ Table 24: cubic-reno-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | cubic | | | | dctcp | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.48 | 0.47 | 0.40 | 0.33 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.56 | 0.60 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.30 | 1.53 | 1.49 | 1.70 | 2.49 | 3.25 | 3.26 | 2.87 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 3.69 | 2.77 | 2.81 | 2.99 | 5.88 | 6.77 | 6.68 | 5.96 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 14.99 | 16.93 | 15.25 | 18.99 | 32.85 | 30.62 | 31.72 | 24.58 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 31.33 | 30.67 | 33.63 | 32.23 | 64.35 | 63.57 | 59.81 | 55.50 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 25: cubic-dctcp Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 22] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+===========+=====+======+======+ | | cubic | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ |1 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.62 | 0.66 | 0.41 | 0.40| 0.34 | 0.24 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ |5 | 2.76 | 3.59 | 3.91 | 4.01 | 2.02 | 1.18| 0.85 | 0.42 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ |10 | 5.48 | 7.95 | 8.24 | 7.81 | 4.08 | 1.60| 1.22 | 1.01 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ |50 | 43.46 | 44.60 | 43.46 | 39.78 | 4.36 | 3.12| 3.75 | 4.29 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ |100| 91.37 | 90.47 | 88.47 | 77.27 | 4.28 | 4.69| 5.59 | 7.74 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ Table 26: cubic-dctcp-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | reno | | | | reno | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.52 | 0.48 | 0.47 | 0.44 | 0.44 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.39 | 2.36 | 2.23 | 1.98 | 2.39 | 2.37 | 2.41 | 2.15 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.74 | 4.86 | 4.79 | 3.92 | 4.82 | 4.51 | 4.40 | 3.93 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 23.88 | 22.77 | 22.88 | 18.78 | 23.95 | 24.90 | 24.03 | 17.50 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 49.89 | 45.68 | 48.07 | 36.99 | 45.76 | 49.17 | 44.65 | 37.37 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 27: reno-reno Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 23] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+======+=======+=======+==========+=======+=======+=======+ | |reno | | | | reno-sce | | | | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 |0.56 | 0.56 | 0.62 | 0.66 | 0.39 | 0.39 | 0.33 | 0.24 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 |2.89 | 3.43 | 3.82 | 3.64 | 1.89 | 1.26 | 0.86 | 0.49 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 |5.77 | 7.71 | 7.91 | 6.96 | 3.80 | 1.78 | 1.38 | 1.44 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 |43.10| 42.13| 39.08 | 28.40 | 4.72 | 5.18 | 6.99 | 14.62 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |100|90.26| 83.33| 78.25 | 62.70 | 5.40 | 10.72 | 13.52 | 19.41 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 28: reno-reno-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | reno | | | | dctcp | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.55 | 0.54 | 0.42 | 0.37 | 0.41 | 0.42 | 0.53 | 0.57 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.60 | 1.65 | 1.58 | 1.44 | 2.18 | 3.12 | 3.15 | 3.09 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.12 | 3.28 | 2.98 | 2.80 | 5.44 | 6.24 | 6.46 | 5.99 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 17.17 | 17.86 | 16.27 | 11.57 | 30.66 | 29.71 | 30.63 | 28.80 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 36.09 | 33.70 | 28.55 | 18.60 | 59.58 | 60.61 | 64.04 | 59.50 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 29: reno-dctcp Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 24] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+----+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 |10 | 20 | 80 | +===+======+=======+=======+=======+===========+====+=======+=======+ | | reno | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+----+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.57 | 0.56 | 0.63 | 0.66 | 0.39 |0.39| 0.33 | 0.24 | +---+------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+----+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.89 | 3.74 | 3.88 | 3.68 | 1.89 |1.03| 0.83 | 0.47 | +---+------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+----+-------+-------+ |10 | 5.70 | 7.72 | 7.94 | 7.03 | 3.86 |1.77| 1.32 | 1.18 | +---+------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+----+-------+-------+ |50 | 43.12| 42.73 | 39.77 | 31.55 | 4.70 |4.57| 6.11 | 9.93 | +---+------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+----+-------+-------+ |100| 90.46| 84.75 | 79.64 | 63.20 | 5.18 |9.21| 11.03 | 11.65 | +---+------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+----+-------+-------+ Table 30: reno-dctcp-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 |10 |20 |80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+==========+=====+=====+=====+==========+=======+=======+=======+ | | reno-sce | | | | reno-sce | | | | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.48 |0.48 |0.48 |0.32 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.34 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.39 |1.99 |1.75 |1.77 | 2.39 | 2.04 | 1.75 | 1.52 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.78 |3.80 |3.82 |4.23 | 4.78 | 4.00 | 3.79 | 4.06 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 24.24 |21.17|24.08|24.69| 23.60 | 26.11 | 22.91 | 20.34 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 42.25 |47.10|37.69|44.31| 53.39 | 48.22 | 57.14 | 40.92 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 31: reno-sce-reno-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 25] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+==========+=====+======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | reno-sce | | | | dctcp | | | | +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.46 | 0.46| 0.31 | 0.19 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.65 | 0.75 | +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.16 | 1.12| 0.78 | 0.38 | 2.63 | 3.66 | 4.00 | 4.20 | +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 3.62 | 1.57| 1.15 | 0.90 | 5.94 | 7.98 | 8.35 | 8.33 | +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 4.03 | 2.33| 2.98 | 10.00 | 43.81 | 45.32 | 44.04 | 32.95 | +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 4.38 | 4.10| 3.77 | 15.34 | 91.30 | 89.54 | 88.99 | 67.81 | +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 32: reno-sce-dctcp Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+----------+------+-------+-------+-----------+-------+----+----+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 |20 |80 | +===+==========+======+=======+=======+===========+=======+====+====+ | | reno-sce | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+----------+------+-------+-------+-----------+-------+----+----+ |1 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.34 | 0.48 | 0.48 |0.48|0.33| +---+----------+------+-------+-------+-----------+-------+----+----+ |5 | 2.39 | 1.97 | 1.65 | 1.78 | 2.39 | 2.05 |1.73|0.96| +---+----------+------+-------+-------+-----------+-------+----+----+ |10 | 4.78 | 3.97 | 3.93 | 5.01 | 4.78 | 3.73 |3.29|2.60| +---+----------+------+-------+-------+-----------+-------+----+----+ |50 | 31.92 | 39.92| 40.62 | 39.76 | 15.90 | 7.24 |5.80|4.70| +---+----------+------+-------+-------+-----------+-------+----+----+ |100| 62.33 | 82.41| 85.50 | 82.05 | 33.30 | 12.61 |9.49|6.82| +---+----------+------+-------+-------+-----------+-------+----+----+ Table 33: reno-sce-dctcp-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 26] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | dctcp | | | | dctcp | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.50 | 0.47 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.45 | 0.47 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.41 | 2.40 | 2.39 | 2.32 | 2.37 | 2.38 | 2.37 | 2.27 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.89 | 4.88 | 4.77 | 4.66 | 4.68 | 4.66 | 4.70 | 4.38 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 23.87 | 23.68 | 25.27 | 19.63 | 23.95 | 23.72 | 21.30 | 21.54 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 49.20 | 45.78 | 47.85 | 41.79 | 46.43 | 47.44 | 45.23 | 39.41 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 34: dctcp-dctcp Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+===========+=====+======+======+ | | dctcp | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ |1 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.63 | 0.75 | 0.45 | 0.46| 0.33 | 0.19 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ |5 | 2.62 | 3.67 | 4.00 | 4.26 | 2.16 | 1.12| 0.76 | 0.34 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ |10 | 5.98 | 7.98 | 8.38 | 8.47 | 3.59 | 1.56| 1.12 | 0.69 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ |50 | 43.80 | 45.41 | 44.22 | 34.01 | 4.02 | 2.21| 2.72 | 9.50 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ |100| 91.58 | 89.85 | 89.10 | 69.89 | 4.07 | 3.82| 3.61 | 8.74 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ Table 35: dctcp-dctcp-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 27] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ | | 0 |10 |20 |80 | 0 |10 | 20 | 80 | +===+===========+=====+=====+=====+===========+=====+=======+=======+ | | dctcp-sce | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.48 |0.48 |0.48 |0.34 | 0.48 |0.48 | 0.48 | 0.33 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.39 |1.99 |1.70 |1.02 | 2.39 |2.04 | 1.66 | 1.01 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.78 |3.78 |3.58 |3.04 | 4.78 |3.71 | 3.23 | 3.33 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ |50 | 24.16 |19.48|19.33|18.15| 23.61 |21.42| 19.76 | 20.18 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ |100| 48.08 |43.17|54.14|19.58| 47.56 |49.83| 36.85 | 19.25 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ Table 36: dctcp-sce-dctcp-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) A.4. Two-Flow TCP Throughput (Cake "flowblind sce-single") +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | cubic | | | | cubic | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.42 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.51 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.42 | 2.31 | 2.44 | 2.21 | 2.36 | 2.46 | 2.29 | 2.30 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.83 | 4.95 | 4.62 | 4.15 | 4.74 | 4.59 | 4.88 | 4.63 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 23.88 | 23.31 | 24.19 | 23.67 | 23.95 | 24.34 | 22.99 | 19.38 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 50.40 | 47.62 | 48.40 | 38.13 | 45.25 | 47.30 | 46.14 | 48.92 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 37: cubic-cubic Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 28] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | cubic | | | | reno | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.55 | 0.46 | 0.44 | 0.40 | 0.41 | 0.50 | 0.51 | 0.52 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.14 | 2.06 | 2.23 | 2.08 | 2.64 | 2.68 | 2.46 | 2.18 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.39 | 4.63 | 4.92 | 4.28 | 5.18 | 4.78 | 4.44 | 4.06 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 22.61 | 24.49 | 25.41 | 29.22 | 25.22 | 23.18 | 21.59 | 12.14 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 46.37 | 48.43 | 44.51 | 52.13 | 49.30 | 46.45 | 48.88 | 31.90 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 38: cubic-reno Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+======+=======+=======+==========+=======+=======+=======+ | |cubic| | | | reno-sce | | | | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 |0.45 | 0.46 | 0.51 | 0.48 | 0.50 | 0.50 | 0.44 | 0.42 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 |2.24 | 3.07 | 3.78 | 3.24 | 2.54 | 1.68 | 0.97 | 1.13 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 |4.16 | 5.59 | 7.04 | 4.21 | 5.40 | 3.78 | 2.36 | 4.18 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 |23.95| 24.71| 25.16 | 17.98 | 23.87 | 22.53 | 21.18 | 20.74 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |100|50.40| 66.75| 65.82 | 64.67 | 45.26 | 28.41 | 28.70 | 22.52 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 39: cubic-reno-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 29] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | cubic | | | | dctcp | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.40 | 0.39 | 0.37 | 0.30 | 0.56 | 0.57 | 0.59 | 0.65 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 1.87 | 1.38 | 1.25 | 1.57 | 2.91 | 3.40 | 3.50 | 3.03 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 3.37 | 1.88 | 1.56 | 2.00 | 6.20 | 7.66 | 7.89 | 7.04 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 6.74 | 5.79 | 6.91 | 11.76 | 41.11 | 39.67 | 37.24 | 30.38 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 11.73 | 12.49 | 11.51 | 22.96 | 83.95 | 71.89 | 69.95 | 60.58 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 40: cubic-dctcp Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ | |0 |10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+=======+=======+===========+=======+=======+=======+ | |cubic| | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 |0.44 |0.46 | 0.51 | 0.55 | 0.52 | 0.49 | 0.44 | 0.37 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 |2.40 |3.18 | 3.69 | 3.46 | 2.39 | 1.58 | 1.06 | 0.89 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 |4.02 |6.35 | 7.58 | 5.48 | 5.54 | 3.09 | 1.87 | 2.58 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 |24.54|37.56| 35.51 | 27.95 | 23.29 | 10.16 | 11.77 | 15.42 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |100|59.52|77.63| 80.96 | 75.79 | 36.12 | 17.42 | 13.35 | 11.62 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 41: cubic-dctcp-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 30] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | reno | | | | reno | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.49 | 0.47 | 0.49 | 0.46 | 0.47 | 0.48 | 0.47 | 0.45 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.38 | 2.39 | 2.33 | 1.96 | 2.40 | 2.35 | 2.33 | 2.16 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.78 | 4.58 | 4.63 | 3.79 | 4.79 | 4.84 | 4.61 | 4.23 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 24.05 | 23.35 | 24.20 | 19.51 | 23.78 | 24.33 | 22.69 | 16.79 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 46.69 | 50.26 | 46.11 | 35.97 | 48.97 | 44.58 | 46.86 | 38.56 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 42: reno-reno Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+======+=======+=======+==========+=======+=======+=======+ | |reno | | | | reno-sce | | | | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 |0.47 | 0.50 | 0.49 | 0.49 | 0.49 | 0.46 | 0.47 | 0.39 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 |2.51 | 2.89 | 3.58 | 3.08 | 2.27 | 1.83 | 1.12 | 1.11 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 |4.51 | 5.67 | 6.96 | 4.39 | 5.06 | 3.55 | 2.22 | 3.74 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 |23.88| 26.49| 26.33 | 15.66 | 23.94 | 20.93 | 19.68 | 21.41 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |100|53.06| 62.99| 58.85 | 48.15 | 42.59 | 31.69 | 33.83 | 38.41 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 43: reno-reno-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 31] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | reno | | | | dctcp | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.42 | 0.42 | 0.38 | 0.33 | 0.54 | 0.53 | 0.58 | 0.62 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.00 | 1.50 | 1.47 | 1.49 | 2.79 | 3.28 | 3.28 | 3.06 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 3.62 | 2.19 | 1.92 | 2.07 | 5.95 | 7.35 | 7.53 | 6.87 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 7.80 | 6.96 | 6.91 | 8.15 | 40.04 | 38.98 | 37.41 | 31.25 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 13.40 | 13.20 | 10.37 | 16.04 | 82.28 | 72.23 | 70.72 | 61.88 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 44: reno-dctcp Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ | |0 |10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+=======+=======+===========+=======+=======+=======+ | |reno | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 |0.47 |0.48 | 0.48 | 0.24 | 0.49 | 0.47 | 0.47 | 0.66 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 |2.50 |3.15 | 3.64 | 2.92 | 2.28 | 1.59 | 1.07 | 1.10 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 |4.53 |6.77 | 7.30 | 5.18 | 5.04 | 2.65 | 1.91 | 2.55 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 |26.20|35.85| 34.81 | 22.99 | 21.62 | 11.46 | 11.45 | 19.58 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |100|64.59|71.71| 71.03 | 59.15 | 31.06 | 22.61 | 20.74 | 17.50 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 45: reno-dctcp-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 32] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 |10 |20 |80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+==========+=====+=====+=====+==========+=======+=======+=======+ | | reno-sce | | | | reno-sce | | | | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.47 |0.48 |0.50 |0.41 | 0.49 | 0.48 | 0.45 | 0.41 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.39 |2.19 |2.04 |1.81 | 2.39 | 2.15 | 1.85 | 1.97 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.77 |4.13 |3.90 |3.65 | 4.79 | 4.21 | 4.05 | 4.16 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 23.90 |23.79|21.48|17.40| 23.92 | 23.94 | 25.97 | 21.52 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 48.57 |54.33|48.58|47.14| 47.10 | 40.97 | 46.49 | 41.08 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 46: reno-sce-reno-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+==========+=====+======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | reno-sce | | | | dctcp | | | | +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.41 | 0.41| 0.38 | 0.28 | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.58 | 0.66 | +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 1.87 | 1.39| 1.06 | 0.67 | 2.91 | 3.38 | 3.69 | 3.96 | +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 3.69 | 2.43| 2.03 | 1.17 | 5.88 | 7.08 | 7.37 | 7.96 | +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 6.49 | 3.69| 3.98 | 9.37 | 41.35 | 41.62 | 39.72 | 30.90 | +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 7.56 | 6.25| 6.13 | 16.00 | 88.12 | 76.49 | 72.46 | 62.73 | +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 47: reno-sce-dctcp Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 33] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+------+-------+-------+ | | 0 |10 |20 |80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+==========+=====+=====+=====+===========+======+=======+=======+ | | reno-sce | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.47 |0.47 |0.49 |0.42 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.46 | 0.40 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.35 |2.10 |1.91 |2.27 | 2.43 | 2.20 | 1.94 | 1.38 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.78 |4.37 |4.89 |4.74 | 4.78 | 3.78 | 2.97 | 2.62 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+------+-------+-------+ |50 | 27.23 |39.56|40.95|25.72| 20.59 | 8.16 | 6.56 | 13.56 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+------+-------+-------+ |100| 74.00 |82.84|79.48|67.86| 21.65 | 12.49| 15.53 | 11.94 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+------+-------+-------+ Table 48: reno-sce-dctcp-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | dctcp | | | | dctcp | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.47 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.47 | 0.47 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.38 | 2.35 | 2.35 | 2.30 | 2.40 | 2.43 | 2.42 | 2.32 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.74 | 4.76 | 4.73 | 4.33 | 4.82 | 4.79 | 4.72 | 4.63 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 24.18 | 22.36 | 22.40 | 13.88 | 23.63 | 24.65 | 23.05 | 26.04 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 42.61 | 32.42 | 25.55 | 43.30 | 53.04 | 56.18 | 59.67 | 35.60 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 49: dctcp-dctcp Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 34] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+===========+=====+======+======+ | | dctcp | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ |1 | 0.56 | 0.56 | 0.58 | 0.68 | 0.40 | 0.41| 0.37 | 0.27 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ |5 | 2.89 | 2.38 | 3.66 | 3.91 | 1.90 | 2.54| 1.09 | 0.67 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ |10 | 5.97 | 5.93 | 7.55 | 8.00 | 3.60 | 3.58| 1.85 | 1.05 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ |50 | 41.35 | 41.32 | 39.50 | 31.56 | 6.47 | 3.79| 3.92 | 9.96 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ |100| 89.09 | 76.31 | 73.53 | 63.92 | 6.60 | 6.36| 4.97 | 9.40 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-----------+-----+------+------+ Table 50: dctcp-dctcp-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ | | 0 |10 |20 |80 | 0 |10 | 20 | 80 | +===+===========+=====+=====+=====+===========+=====+=======+=======+ | | dctcp-sce | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.50 |0.48 |0.49 |0.40 | 0.46 |0.48 | 0.47 | 0.41 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.40 |2.12 |1.90 |1.65 | 2.39 |2.14 | 1.92 | 1.58 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.78 |3.91 |3.45 |3.71 | 4.79 |3.92 | 3.59 | 3.33 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ |50 | 23.65 |24.33|22.34|21.85| 24.19 |23.17| 24.15 | 21.08 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ |100| 53.54 |59.02|54.68|46.28| 42.10 |36.29| 40.24 | 43.95 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ Table 51: dctcp-sce-dctcp-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 35] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 A.5. Two-Flow TCP Throughput (Cake "triple-isolate") +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | cubic | | | | cubic | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.46 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.46 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.39 | 2.39 | 2.39 | 2.20 | 2.39 | 2.39 | 2.36 | 2.21 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.78 | 4.74 | 4.80 | 4.42 | 4.78 | 4.79 | 4.70 | 4.19 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 23.91 | 23.82 | 23.59 | 20.89 | 23.91 | 23.83 | 23.56 | 22.55 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 47.83 | 47.40 | 46.89 | 43.30 | 47.82 | 47.40 | 47.48 | 43.60 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 52: cubic-cubic Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | cubic | | | | reno | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.46 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.45 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.39 | 2.39 | 2.48 | 2.11 | 2.39 | 2.39 | 2.18 | 2.16 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.78 | 4.71 | 4.81 | 4.43 | 4.78 | 4.80 | 4.60 | 4.20 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 23.91 | 24.24 | 24.11 | 23.11 | 23.91 | 23.42 | 22.23 | 17.99 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 47.83 | 48.65 | 48.14 | 48.87 | 47.83 | 46.14 | 43.84 | 35.92 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 53: cubic-reno Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 36] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+======+=======+=======+==========+=======+=======+=======+ | |cubic| | | | reno-sce | | | | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 |0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.57 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.32 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 |2.39 | 2.70 | 2.87 | 3.40 | 2.39 | 2.00 | 1.75 | 1.00 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 |4.78 | 5.60 | 5.38 | 4.56 | 4.78 | 3.75 | 3.79 | 4.09 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 |23.92| 24.11| 23.51 | 20.30 | 23.90 | 23.56 | 23.72 | 24.27 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |100|47.83| 47.45| 46.41 | 42.39 | 47.81 | 47.71 | 48.22 | 48.49 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 54: cubic-reno-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | cubic | | | | dctcp | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.44 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.50 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.39 | 2.38 | 2.34 | 2.16 | 2.39 | 2.40 | 2.41 | 2.35 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.78 | 4.68 | 4.77 | 4.38 | 4.78 | 4.85 | 4.71 | 4.44 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 23.91 | 23.86 | 23.36 | 21.81 | 23.91 | 23.68 | 23.58 | 21.10 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 47.84 | 47.77 | 46.77 | 47.27 | 47.82 | 46.94 | 47.30 | 40.48 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 55: cubic-dctcp Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 37] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ | |0 |10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+=======+=======+===========+=======+=======+=======+ | |cubic| | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 |0.48 |0.48 | 0.48 | 0.58 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.31 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 |2.39 |2.69 | 2.94 | 3.58 | 2.39 | 2.02 | 1.68 | 0.74 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 |4.78 |5.81 | 6.15 | 6.93 | 4.78 | 3.57 | 3.03 | 1.62 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 |24.02|27.16| 26.07 | 20.95 | 23.80 | 20.14 | 19.16 | 21.20 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |100|47.85|49.02| 47.67 | 42.50 | 47.80 | 46.02 | 45.94 | 42.97 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 56: cubic-dctcp-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | reno | | | | reno | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.46 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.46 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.39 | 2.37 | 2.31 | 2.04 | 2.39 | 2.35 | 2.33 | 2.01 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.78 | 4.81 | 4.60 | 4.25 | 4.78 | 4.74 | 4.60 | 4.33 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 23.91 | 23.77 | 23.07 | 17.70 | 23.91 | 23.77 | 22.92 | 17.72 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 47.83 | 47.39 | 45.06 | 37.23 | 47.83 | 47.54 | 44.58 | 35.40 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 57: reno-reno Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 38] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+======+=======+=======+==========+=======+=======+=======+ | |reno | | | | reno-sce | | | | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 |0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.55 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.32 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 |2.39 | 2.61 | 2.76 | 2.91 | 2.39 | 2.01 | 1.76 | 1.16 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 |4.78 | 5.39 | 5.44 | 4.34 | 4.78 | 3.84 | 3.76 | 4.24 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 |23.93| 23.81| 22.02 | 17.75 | 23.90 | 23.72 | 24.79 | 25.80 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |100|47.83| 46.09| 42.73 | 35.26 | 47.82 | 49.03 | 50.97 | 50.07 | +---+-----+------+-------+-------+----------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 58: reno-reno-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | reno | | | | dctcp | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.43 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.50 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.39 | 2.30 | 2.27 | 1.88 | 2.39 | 2.47 | 2.47 | 2.44 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.78 | 4.73 | 4.66 | 4.19 | 4.78 | 4.79 | 4.78 | 4.30 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 23.91 | 23.45 | 21.71 | 17.98 | 23.91 | 24.13 | 24.75 | 21.47 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 47.82 | 46.42 | 43.70 | 35.62 | 47.81 | 48.18 | 49.48 | 42.19 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 59: reno-dctcp Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 39] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ | |0 |10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+=======+=======+===========+=======+=======+=======+ | |reno | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 |0.48 |0.48 | 0.48 | 0.54 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.33 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 |2.39 |2.60 | 2.81 | 3.25 | 2.39 | 2.02 | 1.69 | 0.75 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 |4.78 |5.65 | 6.18 | 6.09 | 4.78 | 3.60 | 2.97 | 1.90 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 |24.05|27.29| 24.37 | 18.32 | 23.77 | 19.78 | 19.76 | 22.57 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |100|47.87|47.75| 44.23 | 35.55 | 47.79 | 46.27 | 47.20 | 42.70 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 60: reno-dctcp-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 |10 |20 |80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+==========+=====+=====+=====+==========+=======+=======+=======+ | | reno-sce | | | | reno-sce | | | | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.48 |0.48 |0.48 |0.34 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.33 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.39 |2.05 |1.80 |1.75 | 2.39 | 2.03 | 1.89 | 1.62 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.78 |4.15 |4.14 |4.22 | 4.78 | 4.15 | 4.12 | 4.31 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 23.91 |23.66|23.54|22.01| 23.90 | 23.69 | 23.24 | 22.75 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 47.82 |47.66|47.52|45.05| 47.82 | 47.66 | 47.54 | 44.97 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+----------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 61: reno-sce-reno-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 40] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 |10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+==========+=====+======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | reno-sce | | | | dctcp | | | | +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.48 |0.48 | 0.48 | 0.32 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.61 | +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.39 |1.98 | 1.71 | 0.91 | 2.39 | 2.78 | 2.95 | 3.60 | +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.78 |3.75 | 3.85 | 3.99 | 4.78 | 5.64 | 5.41 | 4.90 | +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 23.91 |23.71| 23.51| 22.56 | 23.91 | 23.99 | 23.57 | 20.79 | +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 47.83 |48.07| 47.63| 46.93 | 47.83 | 47.03 | 46.40 | 39.48 | +---+----------+-----+------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 62: reno-sce-dctcp Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+------+-------+-------+ | | 0 |10 |20 |80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+==========+=====+=====+=====+===========+======+=======+=======+ | | reno-sce | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.48 |0.48 |0.48 |0.33 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.34 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.39 |2.01 |1.86 |1.82 | 2.39 | 2.05 | 1.73 | 1.03 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.78 |4.24 |4.60 |6.33 | 4.78 | 3.95 | 3.36 | 1.97 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+------+-------+-------+ |50 | 24.01 |26.91|27.21|23.75| 23.81 | 18.74| 16.94 | 18.75 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+------+-------+-------+ |100| 47.85 |49.17|49.32|46.19| 47.81 | 45.83| 44.78 | 40.59 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+------+-------+-------+ Table 63: reno-sce-dctcp-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 41] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ | | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+=======+ | | dctcp | | | | dctcp | | | | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.47 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.47 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.39 | 2.39 | 2.38 | 2.24 | 2.39 | 2.39 | 2.38 | 2.24 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.78 | 4.76 | 4.73 | 4.45 | 4.78 | 4.77 | 4.71 | 4.47 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 | 23.91 | 23.70 | 23.29 | 20.37 | 23.91 | 23.70 | 23.30 | 20.80 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ |100| 47.73 | 47.13 | 46.71 | 39.67 | 47.73 | 47.17 | 46.73 | 41.12 | +---+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 64: dctcp-dctcp Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ | |0 |10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+=======+=======+===========+=======+=======+=======+ | |dctcp| | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |1 |0.48 |0.48 | 0.48 | 0.62 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.48 | 0.31 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |5 |2.39 |2.77 | 3.00 | 3.86 | 2.39 | 1.98 | 1.67 | 0.64 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |10 |4.78 |5.76 | 6.17 | 6.85 | 4.78 | 3.61 | 3.10 | 1.74 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |50 |24.01|27.30| 26.52 | 20.66 | 23.81 | 19.96 | 19.56 | 19.92 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ |100|47.85|48.63| 48.11 | 40.69 | 47.77 | 46.10 | 45.60 | 38.33 | +---+-----+-----+-------+-------+-----------+-------+-------+-------+ Table 65: dctcp-dctcp-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 42] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ | | 0 |10 |20 |80 | 0 |10 | 20 | 80 | +===+===========+=====+=====+=====+===========+=====+=======+=======+ | | dctcp-sce | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ |1 | 0.48 |0.48 |0.48 |0.34 | 0.48 |0.48 | 0.48 | 0.34 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ |5 | 2.39 |2.04 |1.71 |1.09 | 2.39 |2.03 | 1.76 | 1.06 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ |10 | 4.78 |3.91 |3.55 |2.97 | 4.78 |4.01 | 3.59 | 2.84 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ |50 | 23.88 |21.37|20.20|19.68| 23.91 |21.09| 20.51 | 20.44 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ |100| 47.82 |45.19|43.83|36.16| 47.82 |46.37| 44.59 | 37.07 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+-----+-----------+-----+-------+-------+ Table 66: dctcp-sce-dctcp-sce Mean TCP Throughput (Mbit); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) A.6. Two-Flow TCP RTT (Cake "flowblind") +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=======+=======+========+=======+=======+=======+========+ | |cubic| | | | cubic | | | | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |70.73| 69.97 | 83.70 | 139.06 | 69.07 | 70.38 | 86.15 | 140.64 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |14.09| 25.54 | 35.72 | 91.62 | 14.26 | 25.99 | 35.59 | 91.28 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |7.88 | 18.69 | 28.67 | 86.54 | 7.79 | 18.46 | 28.60 | 85.74 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.53 | 16.30 | 25.55 | 82.98 | 6.47 | 16.37 | 25.66 | 83.06 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.35 | 16.40 | 25.49 | 83.27 | 6.43 | 16.29 | 25.57 | 83.36 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 67: cubic-cubic Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 43] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=======+=======+========+=======+=======+=======+========+ | |cubic| | | | reno | | | | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |65.97| 71.14 | 83.63 | 139.14 | 66.25 | 72.11 | 87.70 | 140.12 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |14.00| 25.94 | 35.16 | 91.73 | 14.87 | 25.03 | 35.98 | 92.22 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |7.60 | 18.82 | 28.77 | 86.37 | 7.99 | 19.39 | 29.11 | 86.39 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.43 | 16.26 | 25.45 | 82.72 | 6.41 | 16.38 | 25.46 | 83.06 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.31 | 16.20 | 25.09 | 83.07 | 6.47 | 16.09 | 25.11 | 83.19 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 68: cubic-reno Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 |10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+======+========+==========+=======+=======+========+ | |cubic| | | | reno-sce | | | | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |71.98|73.29| 93.38| 127.68 | 61.37 | 61.69 | 71.07 | 121.98 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |14.58|25.06| 33.50| 88.85 | 11.80 | 21.16 | 32.19 | 94.96 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |7.70 |17.86| 27.34| 85.73 | 6.98 | 18.59 | 30.43 | 90.51 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |5.95 |15.00| 24.47| 83.61 | 6.01 | 16.71 | 26.93 | 86.54 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.01 |14.78| 24.44| 83.56 | 6.06 | 15.99 | 26.21 | 85.14 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 69: cubic-reno-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 44] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=======+=======+========+=======+=======+=======+========+ | |cubic| | | | dctcp | | | | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |61.63| 62.74 | 79.63 | 144.41 | 81.28 | 81.99 | 88.30 | 142.69 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |12.75| 27.02 | 38.94 | 94.68 | 18.98 | 24.23 | 33.58 | 92.59 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |7.19 | 20.98 | 30.61 | 87.70 | 8.12 | 17.94 | 27.88 | 86.25 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.84 | 16.43 | 26.24 | 83.90 | 6.38 | 16.05 | 26.01 | 84.39 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.49 | 16.34 | 26.42 | 85.08 | 6.46 | 16.42 | 26.19 | 84.83 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 70: cubic-dctcp Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 |10 |20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+=====+========+===========+=======+=======+========+ | |cubic| | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |73.64|72.10|92.35| 127.57 | 60.95 | 63.18 | 73.14 | 117.81 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |14.10|23.88|32.68| 89.27 | 11.73 | 21.25 | 32.24 | 95.10 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |7.99 |17.94|27.11| 85.58 | 6.94 | 18.23 | 30.11 | 91.01 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |5.91 |14.97|24.16| 83.11 | 5.97 | 16.67 | 26.92 | 86.08 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.13 |14.98|24.27| 82.93 | 6.08 | 16.17 | 26.17 | 84.85 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 71: cubic-dctcp-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 45] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=======+=======+========+=======+=======+=======+========+ | |reno | | | | reno | | | | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |64.31| 68.79 | 84.19 | 141.79 | 66.79 | 71.57 | 83.55 | 140.03 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |14.46| 25.39 | 35.62 | 92.66 | 14.61 | 25.49 | 35.57 | 92.29 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.15 | 18.91 | 29.00 | 86.57 | 8.08 | 18.83 | 29.11 | 86.26 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.49 | 16.43 | 24.97 | 82.44 | 6.44 | 16.23 | 25.06 | 82.48 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.43 | 16.20 | 24.68 | 82.39 | 6.50 | 16.18 | 24.91 | 82.39 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 72: reno-reno Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 |10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+======+========+==========+=======+=======+========+ | |reno | | | | reno-sce | | | | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |68.15|70.79| 91.27| 130.38 | 62.79 | 62.52 | 75.28 | 122.99 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |14.95|23.90| 34.12| 89.47 | 12.89 | 21.95 | 33.51 | 95.43 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.05 |18.27| 28.12| 85.51 | 7.22 | 18.71 | 29.40 | 90.04 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |5.99 |14.84| 24.17| 83.36 | 6.09 | 16.08 | 25.91 | 84.37 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.19 |14.61| 24.02| 83.03 | 6.05 | 15.50 | 25.06 | 83.81 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 73: reno-reno-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 46] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+-----+-------+--------+--------+--------+-------+--------+ | |0 |10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+=======+========+========+========+=======+========+ | |reno | | | | dctcp | | | | +---+-----+-----+-------+--------+--------+--------+-------+--------+ |1 |59.96|62.40| 83.02 | 144.86 | 114.59 | 108.05 | 87.97 | 143.70 | +---+-----+-----+-------+--------+--------+--------+-------+--------+ |5 |12.78|27.64| 38.54 | 95.38 | 22.21 | 24.00 | 33.12 | 92.06 | +---+-----+-----+-------+--------+--------+--------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.10 |20.18| 30.66 | 88.42 | 8.31 | 18.10 | 27.56 | 86.64 | +---+-----+-----+-------+--------+--------+--------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.87 |16.58| 26.04 | 83.56 | 6.48 | 16.36 | 25.81 | 83.38 | +---+-----+-----+-------+--------+--------+--------+-------+--------+ |100|6.38 |16.54| 26.00 | 84.56 | 6.48 | 16.43 | 25.93 | 83.75 | +---+-----+-----+-------+--------+--------+--------+-------+--------+ Table 74: reno-dctcp Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 |10 |20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+=====+========+===========+=======+=======+========+ | |reno | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |67.25|70.19|93.80| 131.16 | 63.59 | 63.29 | 75.04 | 120.28 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |15.01|26.28|34.17| 89.37 | 12.68 | 23.72 | 33.43 | 94.57 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |7.89 |18.30|27.91| 85.30 | 7.11 | 18.84 | 29.84 | 90.39 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.09 |14.74|23.74| 82.58 | 6.07 | 16.17 | 25.95 | 84.17 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|5.78 |14.32|23.62| 82.36 | 5.95 | 15.20 | 24.81 | 83.98 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 75: reno-dctcp-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 47] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ | | 0 |10 |20 | 80 | 0 |10 |20 | 80 | +===+==========+=====+=====+========+==========+=====+=====+========+ | | reno-sce | | | | reno-sce | | | | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ |1 | 49.45 |50.66|50.71| 114.04 | 50.74 |50.87|50.54| 113.68 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ |5 | 9.58 |19.47|30.20| 88.97 | 9.66 |19.40|30.39| 89.81 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ |10 | 6.55 |16.99|27.00| 85.35 | 6.55 |16.61|26.91| 85.29 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ |50 | 4.46 |13.52|23.27| 82.93 | 4.54 |13.35|23.26| 83.11 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ |100| 4.40 |14.06|23.83| 82.74 | 4.21 |14.07|23.74| 82.71 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ Table 76: reno-sce-reno-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ | | 0 |10 |20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+==========+=====+=====+========+======+=======+=======+========+ | | reno-sce | | | | dctcp| | | | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 | 53.35 |54.29|82.98| 132.00 | 93.33| 94.62 | 84.60 | 141.33 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 | 11.15 |21.45|31.72| 93.81 | 18.29| 23.96 | 33.21 | 90.14 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 | 7.04 |18.09|30.04| 92.23 | 8.00 | 17.48 | 27.41 | 86.25 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 | 6.15 |16.43|27.42| 85.57 | 6.32 | 15.91 | 25.72 | 83.84 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ |100| 6.29 |16.54|26.52| 85.06 | 6.41 | 16.26 | 26.07 | 83.57 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 77: reno-sce-dctcp Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 48] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ | | 0 |10 |20 | 80 | 0 |10 |20 | 80 | +===+==========+=====+=====+=======+===========+=====+=====+========+ | | reno-sce | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |1 | 49.87 |51.12|50.45| 113.39| 50.23 |50.54|50.13| 112.50 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |5 | 9.57 |19.48|30.47| 88.94 | 9.64 |19.11|29.76| 91.18 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |10 | 6.58 |16.86|27.26| 84.81 | 6.63 |16.66|27.39| 85.95 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |50 | 4.20 |12.98|22.81| 82.45 | 4.59 |14.89|24.87| 84.83 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |100| 4.15 |13.47|23.29| 82.64 | 4.11 |14.16|24.11| 83.93 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ Table 78: reno-sce-dctcp-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=======+=======+========+=======+=======+=======+========+ | |dctcp| | | | dctcp | | | | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |94.39| 94.71 | 87.26 | 145.73 | 95.80 | 95.81 | 92.26 | 144.97 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |18.87| 25.91 | 35.08 | 93.41 | 19.48 | 26.10 | 34.76 | 93.83 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |9.29 | 18.56 | 27.94 | 87.31 | 9.40 | 18.65 | 28.15 | 87.12 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.78 | 16.54 | 26.18 | 84.83 | 6.74 | 16.48 | 26.21 | 84.80 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.69 | 16.43 | 25.89 | 85.15 | 6.75 | 16.30 | 25.94 | 85.35 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 79: dctcp-dctcp Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 49] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 |10 |20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+=====+========+===========+=======+=======+========+ | |dctcp| | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |91.81|93.17|83.18| 141.45 | 53.62 | 53.10 | 76.65 | 133.28 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |18.22|23.79|33.56| 91.14 | 11.04 | 21.38 | 31.87 | 93.16 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.06 |17.46|27.21| 86.24 | 7.25 | 18.04 | 29.56 | 92.76 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.14 |15.92|25.60| 83.50 | 6.17 | 16.47 | 27.02 | 86.00 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.35 |16.04|25.95| 83.06 | 6.43 | 16.35 | 26.71 | 85.56 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 80: dctcp-dctcp-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ | | 0 |10 |20 |80 | 0 |10 |20 | 80 | +===+===========+=====+=====+======+===========+=====+=====+========+ | | dctcp-sce | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |1 | 48.67 |49.51|50.22|115.03| 49.42 |49.95|49.96| 113.68 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |5 | 9.56 |19.62|29.79|91.63 | 9.63 |19.19|30.02| 91.44 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |10 | 6.52 |16.78|27.09|85.64 | 6.61 |16.65|27.42| 85.73 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |50 | 4.16 |13.13|22.39|82.21 | 4.18 |12.96|22.47| 82.09 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |100| 3.90 |13.02|22.61|82.16 | 3.97 |12.94|22.72| 82.04 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ Table 81: dctcp-sce-dctcp-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) A.7. Two-Flow TCP RTT (Cake "flowblind sce-single") +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=======+=======+========+=======+=======+=======+========+ | |cubic| | | | cubic | | | | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |68.26| 69.38 | 83.80 | 142.98 | 69.18 | 68.64 | 83.08 | 142.21 | Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 50] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |13.86| 25.36 | 35.54 | 92.39 | 13.92 | 24.90 | 36.61 | 92.30 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.39 | 18.95 | 28.76 | 86.67 | 8.19 | 19.22 | 28.77 | 86.23 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.52 | 16.30 | 25.85 | 83.11 | 6.59 | 16.26 | 25.84 | 83.18 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.42 | 16.49 | 25.57 | 83.19 | 6.40 | 16.38 | 25.65 | 83.22 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 82: cubic-cubic Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=======+=======+========+=======+=======+=======+========+ | |cubic| | | | reno | | | | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |65.10| 69.82 | 83.36 | 144.19 | 64.96 | 69.20 | 85.01 | 144.48 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |13.62| 25.89 | 35.86 | 92.45 | 14.26 | 25.25 | 36.40 | 93.45 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |7.82 | 18.99 | 28.74 | 86.24 | 8.23 | 19.64 | 29.36 | 86.42 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.57 | 16.15 | 25.30 | 82.60 | 6.53 | 16.17 | 25.47 | 83.21 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.46 | 16.14 | 24.89 | 83.04 | 6.54 | 16.23 | 24.88 | 83.28 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 83: cubic-reno Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 51] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 |10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+======+========+==========+=======+=======+========+ | |cubic| | | | reno-sce | | | | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |67.62|68.51| 83.34| 138.15 | 68.37 | 69.98 | 84.17 | 139.38 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |13.56|24.05| 34.64| 91.07 | 13.81 | 24.46 | 37.77 | 96.38 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.16 |18.42| 28.22| 86.47 | 8.07 | 19.70 | 31.56 | 86.75 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.44 |15.91| 25.22| 82.90 | 6.81 | 16.17 | 25.55 | 82.74 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.47 |16.73| 26.43| 84.25 | 6.62 | 16.63 | 26.62 | 84.78 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 84: cubic-reno-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=======+=======+========+=======+=======+=======+========+ | |cubic| | | | dctcp | | | | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |64.14| 64.56 | 77.80 | 145.02 | 65.75 | 64.93 | 80.94 | 142.91 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |13.23| 25.90 | 38.90 | 96.18 | 13.84 | 23.58 | 33.08 | 93.08 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |7.73 | 21.30 | 34.10 | 90.52 | 7.86 | 18.08 | 27.45 | 87.45 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |7.93 | 18.01 | 28.17 | 86.63 | 7.02 | 16.02 | 26.69 | 85.82 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|7.66 | 17.36 | 27.50 | 86.24 | 6.87 | 16.47 | 26.59 | 85.79 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 85: cubic-dctcp Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 52] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 |10 |20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+=====+========+===========+=======+=======+========+ | |cubic| | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |67.09|68.20|83.79| 137.00 | 66.85 | 68.78 | 84.89 | 142.55 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |14.22|24.20|34.59| 90.97 | 13.60 | 24.91 | 36.51 | 96.69 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.16 |18.76|28.16| 86.07 | 8.16 | 20.29 | 31.97 | 88.89 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.42 |16.27|25.71| 83.55 | 6.69 | 17.27 | 26.47 | 84.08 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.54 |16.35|25.54| 83.88 | 6.79 | 16.65 | 26.21 | 84.75 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 86: cubic-dctcp-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=======+=======+========+=======+=======+=======+========+ | |reno | | | | reno | | | | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |67.27| 69.27 | 83.70 | 145.08 | 67.81 | 68.53 | 84.48 | 145.65 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |14.07| 26.21 | 36.48 | 93.63 | 14.28 | 26.00 | 36.21 | 93.05 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.21 | 19.06 | 29.68 | 86.73 | 8.20 | 18.96 | 29.25 | 86.39 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.62 | 16.41 | 24.97 | 82.36 | 6.68 | 16.32 | 25.01 | 82.48 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.57 | 15.91 | 24.64 | 82.45 | 6.45 | 15.90 | 24.65 | 82.56 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 87: reno-reno Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 53] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 |10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+======+========+==========+=======+=======+========+ | |reno | | | | reno-sce | | | | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |67.65|68.24| 83.30| 139.85 | 68.25 | 70.37 | 79.56 | 142.52 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |14.09|24.97| 35.97| 91.33 | 14.55 | 24.35 | 37.58 | 96.81 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.54 |19.17| 28.84| 86.91 | 8.21 | 19.96 | 32.27 | 87.41 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.44 |15.55| 24.88| 82.79 | 6.56 | 16.08 | 25.22 | 82.59 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.40 |16.27| 25.71| 85.25 | 6.74 | 16.42 | 25.90 | 85.13 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 88: reno-reno-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=======+=======+========+=======+=======+=======+========+ | |reno | | | | dctcp | | | | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |62.85| 65.76 | 79.20 | 146.75 | 65.00 | 66.92 | 78.64 | 140.83 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |13.65| 26.18 | 38.66 | 97.29 | 14.02 | 23.92 | 33.54 | 93.24 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.12 | 21.46 | 32.84 | 91.43 | 7.89 | 17.89 | 27.67 | 87.40 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |7.90 | 18.20 | 28.50 | 85.93 | 6.86 | 16.53 | 26.78 | 84.89 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|7.58 | 17.41 | 27.77 | 85.89 | 7.06 | 16.76 | 27.43 | 85.22 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 89: reno-dctcp Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 54] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+------+-------+---------+ | |0 |10 |20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+=====+========+===========+======+=======+=========+ | |reno | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+------+-------+---------+ |1 |66.94|68.38|84.13| 443.94 | 68.15 | 70.50| 80.58 | 1036.03 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+------+-------+---------+ |5 |14.59|25.96|35.41| 91.34 | 14.17 | 25.50| 36.79 | 96.14 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+------+-------+---------+ |10 |8.76 |19.46|28.55| 86.17 | 8.35 | 21.14| 31.51 | 88.70 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+------+-------+---------+ |50 |6.32 |15.99|25.40| 83.48 | 6.63 | 17.15| 26.42 | 83.55 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+------+-------+---------+ |100|6.33 |15.98|25.24| 83.42 | 6.67 | 16.22| 25.74 | 84.21 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+------+-------+---------+ Table 90: reno-dctcp-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ | | 0 |10 |20 | 80 | 0 |10 |20 | 80 | +===+==========+=====+=====+========+==========+=====+=====+========+ | | reno-sce | | | | reno-sce | | | | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ |1 | 71.92 |72.60|85.12| 140.88 | 71.48 |71.82|82.18| 138.74 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ |5 | 14.11 |24.23|34.56| 92.98 | 14.22 |24.21|35.30| 92.20 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ |10 | 9.86 |19.83|29.38| 86.98 | 9.89 |19.80|29.32| 86.79 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ |50 | 6.63 |17.01|26.57| 82.78 | 6.69 |16.95|26.48| 82.69 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ |100| 6.49 |16.69|26.68| 85.00 | 6.53 |16.93|26.69| 85.15 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ Table 91: reno-sce-reno-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 55] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ | | 0 |10 |20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+==========+=====+=====+========+======+=======+=======+========+ | | reno-sce | | | | dctcp| | | | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 | 69.23 |66.60|78.75| 146.62 | 67.72| 67.64 | 79.32 | 139.43 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 | 13.35 |24.63|36.42| 98.92 | 13.90| 23.35 | 32.95 | 92.69 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 | 8.00 |19.99|30.77| 94.50 | 7.85 | 18.12 | 27.44 | 87.54 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 | 8.06 |19.71|31.42| 88.87 | 7.06 | 16.79 | 26.70 | 85.95 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ |100| 8.34 |19.77|32.99| 91.65 | 7.55 | 16.70 | 27.21 | 87.35 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 92: reno-sce-dctcp Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ | | 0 |10 |20 | 80 | 0 |10 |20 | 80 | +===+==========+=====+=====+=======+===========+=====+=====+========+ | | reno-sce | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |1 | 71.87 |72.66|83.24| 139.33| 72.10 |73.13|86.11| 136.98 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |5 | 15.51 |24.77|34.98| 91.65 | 15.39 |23.89|34.00| 93.84 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |10 | 9.89 |19.46|28.37| 87.12 | 9.73 |19.48|30.06| 89.37 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |50 | 6.53 |16.33|25.97| 82.70 | 6.66 |17.52|27.41| 83.22 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |100| 6.81 |16.30|26.07| 83.48 | 6.96 |16.88|26.35| 84.50 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ Table 93: reno-sce-dctcp-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 56] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=======+=======+========+=======+=======+=======+========+ | |dctcp| | | | dctcp | | | | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |68.18| 68.95 | 80.54 | 143.93 | 69.62 | 69.18 | 80.52 | 141.76 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |15.31| 24.50 | 34.27 | 94.45 | 15.27 | 24.16 | 33.93 | 95.11 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.30 | 18.85 | 28.20 | 87.75 | 8.44 | 18.78 | 28.46 | 87.50 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |7.47 | 16.58 | 26.42 | 85.35 | 7.49 | 16.75 | 26.67 | 85.34 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|7.64 | 16.55 | 26.77 | 86.26 | 7.52 | 17.00 | 26.75 | 86.42 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 94: dctcp-dctcp Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+------+-----+--------+-----------+--------+-----+--------+ | |0 |10 |20 | 80 | 0 | 10 |20 | 80 | +===+=====+======+=====+========+===========+========+=====+========+ | |dctcp| | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----+------+-----+--------+-----------+--------+-----+--------+ |1 |66.02|66.25 |78.29| 139.85 | 67.98 | 65.82 |77.89| 145.81 | +---+-----+------+-----+--------+-----------+--------+-----+--------+ |5 |13.88|207.36|32.89| 92.04 | 13.55 | 380.51 |35.59| 98.73 | +---+-----+------+-----+--------+-----------+--------+-----+--------+ |10 |7.81 |80.88 |27.60| 87.58 | 7.95 | 154.57 |30.74| 93.93 | +---+-----+------+-----+--------+-----------+--------+-----+--------+ |50 |6.98 |16.12 |26.46| 85.87 | 8.00 | 19.22 |32.18| 88.74 | +---+-----+------+-----+--------+-----------+--------+-----+--------+ |100|7.72 |16.92 |27.67| 86.88 | 8.67 | 19.60 |32.95| 91.79 | +---+-----+------+-----+--------+-----------+--------+-----+--------+ Table 95: dctcp-dctcp-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 57] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ | | 0 |10 |20 |80 | 0 |10 |20 | 80 | +===+===========+=====+=====+======+===========+=====+=====+========+ | | dctcp-sce | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |1 | 69.76 |71.34|84.74|139.62| 72.85 |71.92|86.45| 137.08 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |5 | 15.58 |23.92|33.94|92.72 | 15.65 |23.80|33.77| 93.02 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |10 | 9.78 |19.14|29.55|90.22 | 9.73 |19.36|29.58| 89.44 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |50 | 6.75 |15.21|24.86|82.92 | 6.80 |15.27|24.83| 83.08 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |100| 6.41 |15.71|25.16|83.67 | 6.59 |15.95|25.31| 83.71 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ Table 96: dctcp-sce-dctcp-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) A.8. Two-Flow TCP RTT (Cake "triple-isolate") +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=======+=======+========+=======+=======+=======+========+ | |cubic| | | | cubic | | | | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |92.48| 88.69 | 88.22 | 131.91 | 92.05 | 90.01 | 87.87 | 131.57 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |18.67| 28.80 | 36.43 | 90.88 | 18.74 | 28.85 | 36.72 | 90.74 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.48 | 18.56 | 28.64 | 86.24 | 8.53 | 18.63 | 28.72 | 86.10 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.51 | 15.85 | 24.13 | 82.81 | 6.60 | 15.85 | 24.00 | 82.69 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.04 | 15.21 | 23.73 | 82.62 | 5.92 | 15.29 | 23.71 | 82.59 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 97: cubic-cubic Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 58] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=======+=======+========+=======+=======+=======+========+ | |cubic| | | | reno | | | | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |90.34| 89.98 | 87.87 | 133.32 | 68.49 | 66.53 | 73.84 | 138.30 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |17.62| 29.12 | 36.16 | 90.80 | 14.13 | 30.47 | 37.59 | 92.04 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.49 | 18.41 | 28.65 | 86.04 | 8.90 | 20.00 | 30.17 | 86.63 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.48 | 15.92 | 23.71 | 82.53 | 6.56 | 15.44 | 23.98 | 82.33 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.15 | 15.14 | 23.53 | 82.86 | 6.22 | 14.57 | 23.50 | 82.20 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 98: cubic-reno Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 |10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+======+========+==========+=======+=======+========+ | |cubic| | | | reno-sce | | | | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |92.71|90.37| 87.84| 129.22 | 50.64 | 50.51 | 50.24 | 117.80 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |16.87|24.55| 35.20| 90.00 | 9.62 | 19.86 | 30.07 | 92.04 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.53 |18.97| 29.09| 86.20 | 6.59 | 16.56 | 26.35 | 85.23 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.55 |15.97| 24.28| 82.65 | 4.41 | 13.89 | 23.32 | 82.85 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.03 |15.27| 23.98| 82.61 | 3.93 | 13.85 | 23.58 | 82.96 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 99: cubic-reno-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 59] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=======+=======+========+=======+=======+=======+========+ | |cubic| | | | dctcp | | | | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |92.60| 89.79 | 87.75 | 135.20 | 97.84 | 96.66 | 96.75 | 149.61 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |14.45| 28.19 | 37.86 | 91.20 | 19.07 | 25.58 | 35.17 | 94.03 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.63 | 18.12 | 28.34 | 86.15 | 8.16 | 17.58 | 27.57 | 87.68 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.57 | 15.82 | 24.40 | 82.81 | 6.80 | 16.42 | 25.94 | 84.05 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.24 | 15.32 | 23.81 | 82.84 | 6.52 | 16.12 | 25.83 | 82.92 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 100: cubic-dctcp Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 |10 |20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+=====+========+===========+=======+=======+========+ | |cubic| | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |92.73|87.54|87.60| 126.28 | 50.28 | 49.77 | 49.69 | 115.82 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |14.77|24.31|34.63| 89.26 | 9.54 | 20.04 | 29.91 | 93.48 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.46 |18.88|28.82| 85.49 | 6.87 | 16.46 | 26.73 | 88.22 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.61 |17.05|24.37| 82.43 | 4.19 | 13.11 | 22.72 | 82.28 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.41 |15.44|23.87| 82.35 | 3.66 | 12.84 | 22.70 | 82.27 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 101: cubic-dctcp-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 60] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=======+=======+========+=======+=======+=======+========+ | |reno | | | | reno | | | | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |68.39| 66.58 | 73.72 | 142.08 | 68.61 | 66.66 | 73.74 | 142.94 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |15.73| 25.66 | 38.41 | 92.20 | 14.62 | 25.71 | 37.82 | 92.07 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.48 | 20.48 | 29.68 | 86.62 | 8.86 | 20.37 | 29.82 | 86.93 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.58 | 15.60 | 23.71 | 82.41 | 6.54 | 15.64 | 23.77 | 82.36 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.32 | 14.10 | 23.44 | 82.17 | 6.36 | 14.13 | 23.13 | 81.99 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 102: reno-reno Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 |10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+======+========+==========+=======+=======+========+ | |reno | | | | reno-sce | | | | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |68.77|66.59| 73.78| 137.04 | 50.65 | 50.32 | 50.23 | 116.09 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |16.12|24.59| 37.04| 90.48 | 9.41 | 19.69 | 30.14 | 91.04 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.46 |19.67| 31.33| 86.72 | 6.76 | 16.53 | 26.33 | 85.41 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.59 |15.65| 23.98| 82.46 | 4.43 | 13.54 | 23.21 | 82.73 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.35 |14.57| 23.37| 82.16 | 4.11 | 13.62 | 23.45 | 82.85 | +---+-----+-----+------+--------+----------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 103: reno-reno-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 61] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=======+=======+========+=======+=======+=======+========+ | |reno | | | | dctcp | | | | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |68.04| 66.19 | 73.70 | 140.21 | 96.81 | 96.80 | 96.58 | 143.33 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |16.18| 26.99 | 38.88 | 92.89 | 18.99 | 24.82 | 35.27 | 93.97 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.59 | 19.99 | 30.15 | 86.79 | 8.27 | 17.92 | 27.99 | 88.08 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.38 | 15.57 | 23.94 | 82.44 | 6.78 | 16.46 | 25.77 | 83.82 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.24 | 14.72 | 23.45 | 82.17 | 6.30 | 16.11 | 24.98 | 82.96 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 104: reno-dctcp Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 |10 |20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+=====+========+===========+=======+=======+========+ | |reno | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |69.06|67.33|65.57| 133.89 | 50.17 | 49.67 | 49.59 | 115.33 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |16.04|24.23|36.62| 89.94 | 9.57 | 19.90 | 30.12 | 93.42 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.51 |19.93|29.67| 85.60 | 6.65 | 16.53 | 26.99 | 87.11 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.47 |16.89|24.02| 82.35 | 4.19 | 13.04 | 22.72 | 82.35 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.35 |14.57|23.39| 81.90 | 3.74 | 12.59 | 22.53 | 82.02 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 105: reno-dctcp-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 62] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ | | 0 |10 |20 | 80 | 0 |10 |20 | 80 | +===+==========+=====+=====+========+==========+=====+=====+========+ | | reno-sce | | | | reno-sce | | | | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ |1 | 50.10 |50.27|50.22| 117.12 | 50.62 |50.44|50.23| 116.67 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ |5 | 9.54 |19.29|29.77| 88.86 | 9.63 |19.25|29.76| 89.43 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ |10 | 6.89 |16.55|26.16| 85.44 | 6.62 |16.47|26.14| 85.52 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ |50 | 4.50 |13.31|22.99| 82.65 | 4.47 |13.28|22.93| 82.60 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ |100| 4.25 |13.89|23.70| 83.01 | 4.14 |13.74|23.59| 82.88 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+----------+-----+-----+--------+ Table 106: reno-sce-reno-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ | | 0 |10 |20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+==========+=====+=====+========+======+=======+=======+========+ | | reno-sce | | | | dctcp| | | | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 | 49.93 |50.27|50.22| 119.15 | 97.30| 97.00 | 96.39 | 135.73 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 | 9.45 |19.45|30.20| 92.32 | 19.13| 23.40 | 33.39 | 91.37 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 | 6.71 |16.62|26.26| 85.57 | 8.16 | 18.21 | 28.41 | 87.40 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 | 4.42 |13.69|23.24| 82.83 | 6.75 | 16.30 | 26.05 | 84.00 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ |100| 4.07 |13.79|23.61| 82.79 | 6.36 | 16.43 | 26.21 | 83.42 | +---+----------+-----+-----+--------+------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 107: reno-sce-dctcp Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 63] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ | | 0 |10 |20 | 80 | 0 |10 |20 | 80 | +===+==========+=====+=====+=======+===========+=====+=====+========+ | | reno-sce | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |1 | 50.11 |50.26|50.22| 115.48| 50.26 |49.68|49.61| 114.34 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |5 | 9.52 |19.16|29.74| 88.60 | 9.61 |19.32|29.60| 91.03 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |10 | 6.49 |16.48|25.83| 84.54 | 6.77 |16.38|26.33| 87.03 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |50 | 4.41 |13.17|22.98| 82.60 | 4.12 |13.08|22.99| 82.38 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |100| 4.16 |13.48|23.17| 82.59 | 3.78 |12.83|22.57| 82.04 | +---+----------+-----+-----+-------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ Table 108: reno-sce-dctcp-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=======+=======+========+=======+=======+=======+========+ | |dctcp| | | | dctcp | | | | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |97.66| 96.66 | 96.60 | 151.58 | 97.03 | 96.71 | 96.65 | 150.04 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |18.76| 25.73 | 35.30 | 93.14 | 19.22 | 25.75 | 35.17 | 93.24 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.15 | 18.04 | 27.99 | 87.51 | 8.36 | 17.57 | 27.57 | 87.54 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.62 | 16.44 | 25.70 | 83.54 | 6.56 | 16.35 | 25.91 | 84.12 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.46 | 16.25 | 26.01 | 82.89 | 6.56 | 16.07 | 25.86 | 82.93 | +---+-----+-------+-------+--------+-------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 109: dctcp-dctcp Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 64] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ | |0 |10 |20 | 80 | 0 | 10 | 20 | 80 | +===+=====+=====+=====+========+===========+=======+=======+========+ | |dctcp| | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |1 |97.80|96.84|96.75| 137.02 | 50.27 | 49.76 | 49.67 | 114.01 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |5 |18.89|23.68|33.54| 91.13 | 9.53 | 19.80 | 29.74 | 93.86 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |10 |8.09 |17.86|28.37| 85.94 | 6.63 | 16.42 | 26.54 | 87.48 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |50 |6.74 |16.51|25.50| 83.04 | 4.06 | 13.08 | 22.68 | 82.42 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ |100|6.44 |16.27|26.02| 83.05 | 3.74 | 12.88 | 22.68 | 82.08 | +---+-----+-----+-----+--------+-----------+-------+-------+--------+ Table 110: dctcp-dctcp-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi- directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ | | 0 |10 |20 |80 | 0 |10 |20 | 80 | +===+===========+=====+=====+======+===========+=====+=====+========+ | | dctcp-sce | | | | dctcp-sce | | | | +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |1 | 50.89 |49.74|49.64|116.00| 50.28 |49.72|49.68| 113.76 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |5 | 9.44 |19.41|30.11|90.46 | 9.53 |19.19|29.78| 91.12 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |10 | 6.66 |16.46|26.39|86.01 | 6.77 |16.44|26.44| 86.28 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |50 | 4.14 |12.85|22.68|82.30 | 4.19 |13.06|22.55| 82.25 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ |100| 3.78 |12.57|22.34|81.86 | 3.80 |12.56|22.26| 81.96 | +---+-----------+-----+-----+------+-----------+-----+-----+--------+ Table 111: dctcp-sce-dctcp-sce Mean TCP RTT (ms); Columns: netem bi-directional Delay (ms); Rows: Cake-limited Bandwidth (Mbit) Authors' Addresses Peter G. Heist Redacted 463 11 Liberec 30 Czech Republic Email: pete@heistp.net Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 65] Internet-Draft sceonetwotests July 2019 Rodney W. Grimes Redacted Portland, OR 97217 United States Email: rgrimes@freebsd.org Jonathan Morton Kokkonranta 21 FI-31520 Pitkajarvi Finland Phone: +358 44 927 2377 Email: chromatix99@gmail.com Heist, et al. Expires 4 January 2020 [Page 66]