Influence of the Router Buffer on Online Games Traffic Multiplexing
•
0 likes•726 views
Jose Saldana, Julian Fernandez-Navajas, Jose Ruiz-Mas, Jose I. Aznar, Eduardo Viruete, Luis Casadesus, "Influence of the Router Buffer on Online Games Traffic Multiplexing" .Proc. International Symposium on Performance Evaluation of Computer and Telecommunication Systems SPECTS 2011, pp.253-258, The Hague, Netherlands, June 2011. ISBN: 978-161-782-309-1
Recommended
More Related Content
Viewers also liked
Viewers also liked (10)
Similar to Influence of the Router Buffer on Online Games Traffic Multiplexing
Similar to Influence of the Router Buffer on Online Games Traffic Multiplexing (20)
More from Jose Saldana
More from Jose Saldana (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Influence of the Router Buffer on Online Games Traffic Multiplexing
- 19. 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 bytes
- 22. η=61/89=68%
- 26. Players . . . Player and local agent Access router Internet Game Server
- 29. Players Wireless link Multiplexer TCM Wireless link . . . TCM Internet Multiplexer Wireless link Players Multiplexer Players TCM Game Server
- 30. Native traffic ... Multiplexed traffic . . . PE PE PE PE ... ...
- 31. Payload Payload Reduced Header ... UDP Reduced Header IP PPP Mux PPP L2TP IP
- 32. L2TP PPP header hea. IP header CH PPP Mux Reduc. header Payload MH RH P ... PPP Mux Reduc. header Payload MH RH P Four IPv4/UDP client-to-server packets of Counter Strike η=61/89=68% One IPv4/TCM packet multiplexing four client-to-server Counter Strike packets η=244/293=83% saving
- 33. Game BWRa IPv4 BWRa IPv6 Engine E[P] pps Unreal T 2003 Unreal 2.0 29.5 25 62% 46% Quake III Id Tech 3 36.15 93 65% 50% Quake II Id Tech 2 37 26.38 66% 51% Counter Strike GoldSrc 41.09 24.65 68% 53% Halo 2 Halo2 43.2 25 69% 54%
- 34. Original trace Client to server Server to client Player 1 to N Client to server traffic Player 1 Player 2 IP/UDP headers compressed Multiplexed, compressed and tunneled Player 1 Player 1 to N Player 2 period ... Player N Not used ... Player N
- 35. 30%-35% 25%-30% 20%-25% 15%-20% 10%-15% 5%-10% 0%-5% Bandwidth Saving 35% 30% 25% 20% 15% 10% 5% 50 ms 40 ms 30 ms 20 ms period 10 ms 0% 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 number of players 7 6 5 4 3 2
- 36. Bandwidth Saving 35% 30% 25% BS 20% 15% 20 players 10% 15 players 10 players 5% 5 players 0% 5 10 15 20 25 30 period (ms) 35 40 45 50
- 37. Bandwidth Saving 35% Asymptote 30% 25% BS 20% 15% 20 players 10% 15 players 10 players 5% 5 players 0% 5 10 15 20 25 30 period (ms) 35 40 45 50
- 38. Bandwidth Saving 35% 30% BS 25% 20% 15% T 10ms T 20ms 10% T 30ms T 40 ms 5% T 50ms 0% 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 number of players
- 39. 5 players 10 players 15 players 20 players Packet size in bytes 1400 1200 Packet size grows linearly bytes 1000 800 600 400 200 0 native 5 10 15 20 25 30 Period in ms 35 40 45 50
- 40. Average Retention Time 20 players 30 15 players 25 10 players 5 players ms 20 15 10 Retention time is half the period avg 5 0 5 15 25 Period in ms 35 45
- 42. Tretention Tprocess Tqueue Tnetwork Tprocess IP network . . . MUX DEMUX Game Server Players IP TCM IP
- 44. Offline post-processing Real Traffic in a testbed Buffer Network, processing delays Game traffic Background Router Traffic Generation Traffic Capture Traffic Trace Final Results
- 46. One way delay for game traffic 200 delay native 180 delay mux 25ms 160 delay mux 50ms OWD (ms) 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 Background traffic (kbps at link level) 900 950 1000
- 47. One way delay for game traffic 200 delay native 180 delay mux 25ms 160 delay mux 50ms OWD (ms) 140 120 100 80 25 + 5 ms 60 12,5 + 5 ms 40 Added mux delays 20 0 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 Background traffic (kbps at link level) 900 950 1000
- 48. One way delay for game traffic 200 delay native 180 delay mux 25ms 160 delay mux 50ms Bandwidth saving 120kbps OWD (ms) 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 Background traffic (kbps at link level) 900 950 1000
- 49. Packet loss for game traffic 18% loss native 16% loss mux 25ms 14% loss mux 50ms packet loss 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 Background traffic (kbps at link level) 900 950 1000
- 50. Packet loss for game traffic 18% loss native 16% loss mux 25ms 14% loss mux 50ms packet loss 12% 10% 8% Bandwidth saving 6% 4% 2% 0% 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 Background traffic (kbps at link level) 900 950 1000
- 51. Packet loss for game traffic 18% loss native 16% loss mux 25ms 14% loss mux 50ms Small saving increase, but double packet size packet loss 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 Background traffic (kbps at link level) 900 950 1000
- 52. One way delay for game traffic 200 delay native 180 delay mux 25ms 160 delay mux 50ms OWD (ms) 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 Background traffic (kbps at link level) 900 950 1000
- 53. One way delay for game traffic 200 delay native 180 delay mux 25ms 160 delay mux 50ms Buffer delay reduction OWD (ms) 140 120 100 80 60 40 Added mux delays 20 0 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 Background traffic (kbps at link level) 900 950 1000
- 54. One way delay for game traffic 200 delay native Bandwidth saving 120kbps 180 delay mux 25ms 160 delay mux 50ms OWD (ms) 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 Background traffic (kbps at link level) 900 950 1000
- 55. Packet loss for game traffic 18% loss native 16% loss mux 25ms 14% loss mux 50ms packet loss 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 Background traffic (kbps at link level) 900 950 1000
- 56. Packet loss for game traffic 18% loss native 16% loss mux 25ms 14% loss mux 50ms packet loss 12% 10% 8% Bandwidth saving 6% 4% 2% 0% 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 Background traffic (kbps at link level) 900 950 1000
- 57. Packet loss for game traffic 18% loss native 16% loss mux 25ms 14% loss mux 50ms packet loss 12% Big BG packets discarded Native ones are small 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 Background traffic (kbps at link level) 900 950 1000
- 58. Packet loss for game traffic 18% loss native 16% loss mux 25ms 14% loss mux 50ms Small saving increase but double packet size packet loss 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 Background traffic (kbps at link level) 900 950 1000
- 59. Packet loss Background Traffic 20% native time limited 18% mux 25ms time limited mux 50ms time limited 16% native high capacity packet loss 14% mux 25ms high capacity mux 50ms high capacity 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 Background traffic (kbps at link level) 850 900 950 1000
- 60. Packet loss Background Traffic 20% native time limited 18% Buffer size does not significantly modify BG packet loss mux 25ms time limited mux 50ms time limited 16% native high capacity packet loss 14% mux 25ms high capacity mux 50ms high capacity 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 Background traffic (kbps at link level) 850 900 950 1000
- 61. Packet loss Background Traffic 20% native time limited 18% Bandwidth saving is always beneficial for BG traffic mux 25ms time limited mux 50ms time limited 16% native high capacity packet loss 14% mux 25ms high capacity mux 50ms high capacity 12% 10% 8% 6% 4% 2% 0% 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 Background traffic (kbps at link level) 850 900 950 1000