Calculating the throughput of a given TCP connection
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Given a TCP session, is there a way to determine the throughput of the sender?
I have a wireshark sniff, and I see that to calculate the throughput of the sender I can use theTCP-Window-Size-in-bits / Latency-in-seconds = Bits-per-second-throughput formula,
But the window is constantly changing (due to the tcp protocol).
Furthermore, why does the tcp window size is taken into account? isn't that true that sometimes the sender sends more than one segment before receiving the ack?
tcp wireshark
asked yesterday
DsCpp
1323
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Given a TCP session, is there a way to determine the throughput of the sender?
I have a wireshark sniff, and I see that to calculate the throughput of the sender I can use theTCP-Window-Size-in-bits / Latency-in-seconds = Bits-per-second-throughput formula,
But the window is constantly changing (due to the tcp protocol).
Furthermore, why does the tcp window size is taken into account? isn't that true that sometimes the sender sends more than one segment before receiving the ack?
tcp wireshark
asked yesterday
DsCpp
1323
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
Given a TCP session, is there a way to determine the throughput of the sender?
I have a wireshark sniff, and I see that to calculate the throughput of the sender I can use theTCP-Window-Size-in-bits / Latency-in-seconds = Bits-per-second-throughput formula,
But the window is constantly changing (due to the tcp protocol).
Furthermore, why does the tcp window size is taken into account? isn't that true that sometimes the sender sends more than one segment before receiving the ack?
tcp wireshark
asked yesterday
DsCpp
1323
Given a TCP session, is there a way to determine the throughput of the sender?
I have a wireshark sniff, and I see that to calculate the throughput of the sender I can use theTCP-Window-Size-in-bits / Latency-in-seconds = Bits-per-second-throughput formula,
But the window is constantly changing (due to the tcp protocol).
Furthermore, why does the tcp window size is taken into account? isn't that true that sometimes the sender sends more than one segment before receiving the ack?
tcp wireshark
tcp wireshark
asked yesterday
DsCpp
1323
asked yesterday
DsCpp
1323
asked yesterday
DsCpp
1323
asked yesterday
DsCpp
1323
asked yesterday
DsCpp
1323
1323
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
up vote
4
down vote
isn't that true that sometimes the sender sends more than one segment before receiving the ack?
This is exactly what "window" means. Imagine a protocol requiring acknowledgment but only sending a single data packet/segment each time (window = 1 segment) - there can only be a single segment/ACK pair in each round-trip period, regardless of the actual bandwidth.
The send window provides a method to send multiple segments consecutively before expecting ACKs. Each segment that's ACKed is removed from the send window and the window advanced to a new segment - hence "sliding window".
Sending multiple segments "in parallel" with an adaptive, sliding window, you can make use of the total bandwidth. Generally, you cannot transport more data than one full window within each RTT period.
TCP uses a sliding window that is controlled by the (constantly monitored) RTT value as congestion sensor - from a simplified perspective, when RTT goes up, the window size goes down and vice versa. Naturally, each value may change at any time due to the network load and other variables.
answered yesterday
Zac67
23.9k21252
The windows is not only sliding, but also adapting to the dynamic net, i.e. getting bigger/smaller regards the RTT and packet drop statistics, no? (congestion avoidance algorithms)? do we have a better solution to calculate the throughput than just average the window size over time?
– DsCpp
22 hours ago
The windows size adapts, see my last paragraph. "Throughput" is a instantaneous value, just like RTT and window size. If you average one, you average them all.
– Zac67
12 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
All the measurements are changing: the throughput and the latency can be instantaneous measurements too.
- If you want an average, measure it over a long period
- Yes, the sender very often will send segments before getting the acknowledgment
answered yesterday
jonathanjo
8,5231629
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
4
down vote
isn't that true that sometimes the sender sends more than one segment before receiving the ack?
This is exactly what "window" means. Imagine a protocol requiring acknowledgment but only sending a single data packet/segment each time (window = 1 segment) - there can only be a single segment/ACK pair in each round-trip period, regardless of the actual bandwidth.
The send window provides a method to send multiple segments consecutively before expecting ACKs. Each segment that's ACKed is removed from the send window and the window advanced to a new segment - hence "sliding window".
Sending multiple segments "in parallel" with an adaptive, sliding window, you can make use of the total bandwidth. Generally, you cannot transport more data than one full window within each RTT period.
TCP uses a sliding window that is controlled by the (constantly monitored) RTT value as congestion sensor - from a simplified perspective, when RTT goes up, the window size goes down and vice versa. Naturally, each value may change at any time due to the network load and other variables.
answered yesterday
Zac67
23.9k21252
The windows is not only sliding, but also adapting to the dynamic net, i.e. getting bigger/smaller regards the RTT and packet drop statistics, no? (congestion avoidance algorithms)? do we have a better solution to calculate the throughput than just average the window size over time?
– DsCpp
22 hours ago
The windows size adapts, see my last paragraph. "Throughput" is a instantaneous value, just like RTT and window size. If you average one, you average them all.
– Zac67
12 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
isn't that true that sometimes the sender sends more than one segment before receiving the ack?
This is exactly what "window" means. Imagine a protocol requiring acknowledgment but only sending a single data packet/segment each time (window = 1 segment) - there can only be a single segment/ACK pair in each round-trip period, regardless of the actual bandwidth.
The send window provides a method to send multiple segments consecutively before expecting ACKs. Each segment that's ACKed is removed from the send window and the window advanced to a new segment - hence "sliding window".
Sending multiple segments "in parallel" with an adaptive, sliding window, you can make use of the total bandwidth. Generally, you cannot transport more data than one full window within each RTT period.
TCP uses a sliding window that is controlled by the (constantly monitored) RTT value as congestion sensor - from a simplified perspective, when RTT goes up, the window size goes down and vice versa. Naturally, each value may change at any time due to the network load and other variables.
answered yesterday
Zac67
23.9k21252
The windows is not only sliding, but also adapting to the dynamic net, i.e. getting bigger/smaller regards the RTT and packet drop statistics, no? (congestion avoidance algorithms)? do we have a better solution to calculate the throughput than just average the window size over time?
– DsCpp
22 hours ago
The windows size adapts, see my last paragraph. "Throughput" is a instantaneous value, just like RTT and window size. If you average one, you average them all.
– Zac67
12 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
4
down vote
up vote
4
down vote
isn't that true that sometimes the sender sends more than one segment before receiving the ack?
This is exactly what "window" means. Imagine a protocol requiring acknowledgment but only sending a single data packet/segment each time (window = 1 segment) - there can only be a single segment/ACK pair in each round-trip period, regardless of the actual bandwidth.
The send window provides a method to send multiple segments consecutively before expecting ACKs. Each segment that's ACKed is removed from the send window and the window advanced to a new segment - hence "sliding window".
Sending multiple segments "in parallel" with an adaptive, sliding window, you can make use of the total bandwidth. Generally, you cannot transport more data than one full window within each RTT period.
TCP uses a sliding window that is controlled by the (constantly monitored) RTT value as congestion sensor - from a simplified perspective, when RTT goes up, the window size goes down and vice versa. Naturally, each value may change at any time due to the network load and other variables.
answered yesterday
Zac67
23.9k21252
isn't that true that sometimes the sender sends more than one segment before receiving the ack?
This is exactly what "window" means. Imagine a protocol requiring acknowledgment but only sending a single data packet/segment each time (window = 1 segment) - there can only be a single segment/ACK pair in each round-trip period, regardless of the actual bandwidth.
The send window provides a method to send multiple segments consecutively before expecting ACKs. Each segment that's ACKed is removed from the send window and the window advanced to a new segment - hence "sliding window".
Sending multiple segments "in parallel" with an adaptive, sliding window, you can make use of the total bandwidth. Generally, you cannot transport more data than one full window within each RTT period.
TCP uses a sliding window that is controlled by the (constantly monitored) RTT value as congestion sensor - from a simplified perspective, when RTT goes up, the window size goes down and vice versa. Naturally, each value may change at any time due to the network load and other variables.
answered yesterday
Zac67
23.9k21252
edited 12 hours ago
answered yesterday
Zac67
23.9k21252
answered yesterday
Zac67
23.9k21252
answered yesterday
Zac67
23.9k21252
23.9k21252
The windows is not only sliding, but also adapting to the dynamic net, i.e. getting bigger/smaller regards the RTT and packet drop statistics, no? (congestion avoidance algorithms)? do we have a better solution to calculate the throughput than just average the window size over time?
– DsCpp
22 hours ago
The windows size adapts, see my last paragraph. "Throughput" is a instantaneous value, just like RTT and window size. If you average one, you average them all.
– Zac67
12 hours ago
add a comment |
The windows is not only sliding, but also adapting to the dynamic net, i.e. getting bigger/smaller regards the RTT and packet drop statistics, no? (congestion avoidance algorithms)? do we have a better solution to calculate the throughput than just average the window size over time?
– DsCpp
22 hours ago
The windows size adapts, see my last paragraph. "Throughput" is a instantaneous value, just like RTT and window size. If you average one, you average them all.
– Zac67
12 hours ago
The windows is not only sliding, but also adapting to the dynamic net, i.e. getting bigger/smaller regards the RTT and packet drop statistics, no? (congestion avoidance algorithms)? do we have a better solution to calculate the throughput than just average the window size over time?
– DsCpp
22 hours ago
The windows is not only sliding, but also adapting to the dynamic net, i.e. getting bigger/smaller regards the RTT and packet drop statistics, no? (congestion avoidance algorithms)? do we have a better solution to calculate the throughput than just average the window size over time?
– DsCpp
22 hours ago
The windows size adapts, see my last paragraph. "Throughput" is a instantaneous value, just like RTT and window size. If you average one, you average them all.
– Zac67
12 hours ago
The windows size adapts, see my last paragraph. "Throughput" is a instantaneous value, just like RTT and window size. If you average one, you average them all.
– Zac67
12 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
All the measurements are changing: the throughput and the latency can be instantaneous measurements too.
- If you want an average, measure it over a long period
- Yes, the sender very often will send segments before getting the acknowledgment
answered yesterday
jonathanjo
8,5231629
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
All the measurements are changing: the throughput and the latency can be instantaneous measurements too.
- If you want an average, measure it over a long period
- Yes, the sender very often will send segments before getting the acknowledgment
answered yesterday
jonathanjo
8,5231629
add a comment |
up vote
2
down vote
up vote
2
down vote
All the measurements are changing: the throughput and the latency can be instantaneous measurements too.
- If you want an average, measure it over a long period
- Yes, the sender very often will send segments before getting the acknowledgment
answered yesterday
jonathanjo
8,5231629
All the measurements are changing: the throughput and the latency can be instantaneous measurements too.
- If you want an average, measure it over a long period
- Yes, the sender very often will send segments before getting the acknowledgment
answered yesterday
jonathanjo
8,5231629
answered yesterday
jonathanjo
8,5231629
answered yesterday
jonathanjo
8,5231629
answered yesterday
jonathanjo
8,5231629
8,5231629
add a comment |
add a comment |
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fnetworkengineering.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f54889%2fcalculating-the-throughput-of-a-given-tcp-connection%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
