twisterp2pnetworkbittorrentblockchainipv6microbloggingdecentralizedsocial-networkdhttwister-ipv6twister-coretwisterarmyp2p-networktwister-server
You can not select more than 25 topics
Topics must start with a letter or number, can include dashes ('-') and can be up to 35 characters long.
347 lines
16 KiB
347 lines
16 KiB
================= |
|
libtorrent manual |
|
================= |
|
|
|
:Author: Arvid Norberg, arvid@rasterbar.com |
|
:Version: 1.0.0 |
|
|
|
.. contents:: Table of contents |
|
:depth: 2 |
|
:backlinks: none |
|
|
|
uTP |
|
=== |
|
|
|
uTP (uTorrent transport protocol) is a transport protocol which uses one-way |
|
delay measurements for its congestion controller. This article is about uTP |
|
in general and specifically about libtorrent's implementation of it. |
|
|
|
rationale |
|
--------- |
|
|
|
One of the most common problems users are experiencing using bittorrent is |
|
that their internet "stops working". This can be caused by a number of things, |
|
for example: |
|
|
|
1. a home router that crashes or slows down when its NAT pin-hole |
|
table overflows, triggered by DHT or simply many TCP connections. |
|
|
|
2. a home router that crashes or slows down by UDP traffic (caused by |
|
the DHT) |
|
|
|
3. a home DSL or cable modem having its send buffer filled up by outgoing |
|
data, and the buffer fits seconds worth of bytes. This adds seconds |
|
of delay on interactive traffic. For a web site that needs 10 round |
|
trips to load this may mean 10s of seconds of delay to load compared |
|
to without bittorrent. Skype or other delay sensitive applications |
|
would be affected even more. |
|
|
|
This document will cover (3). |
|
|
|
Typically this is solved by asking the user to enter a number of bytes |
|
that the client is allowed to send per second (i.e. setting an upload |
|
rate limit). The common recommendation is to set this limit to 80% of the |
|
uplink's capacity. This is to leave some headroom for things like TCP |
|
ACKs as well as the user's interactive use of the connection such as |
|
browsing the web or checking email. |
|
|
|
There are two major drawbacks with this technique: |
|
|
|
1. The user needs to actively make this setting (very few protocols |
|
require the user to provide this sort of information). This also |
|
means the user needs to figure out what its up-link capacity is. |
|
This is unfortunately a number that many ISPs are not advertizing |
|
(because it's often much lower than the download capacity) which |
|
might make it hard to find. |
|
|
|
2. The 20% headroom is wasted most of the time. Whenever the user |
|
is not using the internet connection for anything, those extra 20% |
|
could have been used by bittorrent to upload, but they're already |
|
allocated for interactive traffic. On top of that, 20% of the up-link |
|
is often not enough to give a good and responsive browsing experience. |
|
|
|
The ideal bandwidth allocation would be to use 100% for bittorrent when |
|
there is no interactive cross traffic, and 100% for interactive traffic |
|
whenever there is any. This would not waste any bandwidth while the user |
|
is idling, and it would make for a much better experience when the user |
|
is using the internet connection for other things. |
|
|
|
This is what uTP does. |
|
|
|
TCP |
|
--- |
|
|
|
The reason TCP will fill the send buffer, and cause the delay on all traffic, |
|
is because its congestion control is *only* based on packet loss (and timeout). |
|
|
|
Since the modem is buffering, packets won't get dropped until the entire queue |
|
is full, and no more packets will fit. The packets will be dropped, TCP will |
|
detect this within an RTT or so. When TCP notices a packet loss, it will slow |
|
down its send rate and the queue will start to drain again. However, TCP will |
|
immediately start to ramp up its send rate again until the buffer is full and |
|
it detects packet loss again. |
|
|
|
TCP is designed to fully utilize the link capacity, without causing congestion. |
|
Whenever it sense congestion (through packet loss) it backs off. TCP is not |
|
designed to keep delays low. When you get the first packet loss (assuming the |
|
kind of queue described above, tail-queue) it is already too late. Your queue |
|
is full and you have the maximum amount of delay your modem can provide. |
|
|
|
TCP controls its send rate by limiting the number of bytes in-flight at any |
|
given time. This limit is called congestion window (*cwnd* for short). During |
|
steady state, the congestion window is constantly increasing linearly. Each |
|
packet that is successfully transferred will increase cwnd. |
|
|
|
:: |
|
|
|
cwnd |
|
send_rate = ---- |
|
RTT |
|
|
|
|
|
Send rate is proportional to cwnd divided by RTT. A smaller cwnd will cause |
|
the send rate to be lower and a larger cwnd will cause the send rate to be |
|
higher. |
|
|
|
Using a congestion window instead of controlling the rate directly is simple |
|
because it also introduces an upper bound for memory usage for packets that |
|
haven't been ACKed yet and needs to be kept around. |
|
|
|
The behavior of TCP, where it bumps up against the ceiling, backs off and then |
|
starts increasing again until it hits the ceiling again, forms a saw tooth shape. |
|
If the modem wouldn't have any send buffer at all, a single TCP stream would |
|
not be able to fully utilize the link because of this behavior, since it would |
|
only fully utilize the link right before the packet loss and the back-off. |
|
|
|
LEDBAT congestion controller |
|
---------------------------- |
|
|
|
The congestion controller in uTP is called LEDBAT_, which also is an IETF working |
|
group attempting to standardize it. The congestion controller, on top of reacting |
|
to packet loss the same way TCP does, also reacts to changes in delays. |
|
|
|
For any uTP (or LEDBAT_) implementation, there is a target delay. This is the |
|
amount of delay that is acceptable, and is in fact targeted for the connection. |
|
The target delay is defined to 25 ms in LEDBAT_, uTorrent uses 100 ms and |
|
libtorrent uses 75 ms. Whenever a delay measurement is lower than the target, |
|
cwnd is increased proportional to (target_delay - delay). Whenever the measurement |
|
is higher than the target, cwnd is decreased proportional to (delay - target_delay). |
|
|
|
It can simply be expressed as:: |
|
|
|
cwnd += gain * (target_delay - delay) |
|
|
|
.. image:: cwnd_thumb.png |
|
:target: cwnd.png |
|
:align: right |
|
|
|
Similarly to TCP, this is scaled so that the increase is evened out over one RTT. |
|
|
|
The linear controller will adjust the cwnd more for delays that are far off the |
|
target, and less for delays that are close to the target. This makes it converge |
|
at the target delay. Although, due to noise there is almost always some amount of |
|
oscillation. This oscillation is typically smaller than the saw tooth TCP forms. |
|
|
|
The figure to the right shows how (TCP) cross traffic causese uTP to essentially |
|
entirely stop sending anything. Its delay measurements are mostly well above the target |
|
during this time. The cross traffic is only a single TCP stream in this test. |
|
|
|
As soon as the cross traffic ceases, uTP will pick up its original send rate within |
|
a second. |
|
|
|
Since uTP constantly measures the delay, with every single packet, the reaction time |
|
to cross traffic causing delays is a single RTT (typically a fraction of a second). |
|
|
|
one way delays |
|
-------------- |
|
|
|
uTP measures the delay imposed on packets being sent to the other end |
|
of the connection. This measurement only includes buffering delay along |
|
the link, not propagation delay (the speed of light times distance) nor |
|
the routing delay (the time routers spend figuring out where to forward |
|
the packet). It does this by always comparing all measurements to a |
|
baseline measurement, to cancel out any fixed delay. By focusing on the |
|
variable delay along a link, it will specifically detect points where |
|
there might be congestion, since those points will have buffers. |
|
|
|
.. image:: delays_thumb.png |
|
:target: delays.png |
|
:align: right |
|
|
|
Delay on the return link is explicitly not included in the delay measurement. |
|
This is because in a peer-to-peer application, the other end is likely to also |
|
be connected via a modem, with the same send buffer restrictions as we assume |
|
for the sending side. The other end having its send queue full is not an indication |
|
of congestion on the path going the other way. |
|
|
|
In order to measure one way delays for packets, we cannot rely on clocks being |
|
synchronized, especially not at the microsecond level. Instead, the actual time |
|
it takes for a packet to arrive at the destination is not measured, only the changes |
|
in the transit time is measured. |
|
|
|
Each packet that is sent includes a time stamp of the current time, in microseconds, |
|
of the sending machine. The receiving machine calculates the difference between its |
|
own timestamp and the one in the packet and sends this back in the ACK. This difference, |
|
since it is in microseconds, will essentially be a random 32 bit number. However, |
|
the difference will stay somewhat similar over time. Any changes in this difference |
|
indicates that packets are either going through faster or slower. |
|
|
|
In order to measure the one-way buffering delay, a base delay is established. The |
|
base delay is the lowest ever seen value of the time stamp difference. Each delay |
|
sample we receive back, is compared against the base delay and the delay is the |
|
difference. |
|
|
|
This is the delay that's fed into the congestion controller. |
|
|
|
A histogram of typical delay measurements is shown to the right. This is from |
|
a transfer between a cable modem connection and a DSL connection. |
|
|
|
The details of the delay measurements are slightly more complicated since the |
|
values needs to be able to wrap (cross the 2^32 boundry and start over at 0). |
|
|
|
Path MTU discovery |
|
------------------ |
|
|
|
MTU is short for *Maximum Transfer Unit* and describes the largest packet size that |
|
can be sent over a link. Any datagrams which size exceeds this limit will either |
|
be *fragmented* or dropped. A fragmented datagram means that the payload is split up |
|
in multiple packets, each with its own individual packet header. |
|
|
|
There are several reasons to avoid sending datagrams that get fragmented: |
|
|
|
1. A fragmented datagram is more likely to be lost. If any fragment is lost, |
|
the whole datagram is dropped. |
|
|
|
2. Bandwidth is likely to be wasted. If the datagram size is not divisible |
|
by the MTU the last packet will not contain as much payload as it could, and the |
|
payload over protocol header ratio decreases. |
|
|
|
3. It's expensive to fragment datagrams. Few routers are optimized to handle large |
|
numbers of fragmented packets. Datagrams that have to fragment are likely to |
|
be delayed significantly, and contribute to more CPU being used on routers. |
|
Typically fragmentation (and other advanced IP features) are implemented in |
|
software (slow) and not hardware (fast). |
|
|
|
The path MTU is the lowest MTU of any link along a path from two endpoints on the |
|
internet. The MTU bottleneck isn't necessarily at one of the endpoints, but can |
|
be anywhere in between. |
|
|
|
The most common MTU is 1500 bytes, which is the largest packet size for ethernet |
|
networks. Many home DSL connections, however, tunnel IP through PPPoE (Point to |
|
Point Protocol over Ethernet. Yes, that is the old dial-up modem protocol). This |
|
protocol uses up 8 bytes per packet for its own header. |
|
|
|
If the user happens to be on an internet connection over a VPN, it will add another |
|
layer, with its own packet headers. |
|
|
|
In short; if you would pick the largest possible packet size on an ethernet network, |
|
1472, and stick with it, you would be quite likely to generate fragments for a lot |
|
of connections. The fragments that will be created will be very small and especially |
|
inflate the overhead waste. |
|
|
|
The other approach of picking a very conservative packet size, that would be very |
|
unlikely to get fragmented has the following drawbacks: |
|
|
|
1. People on good, normal, networks will be penalized with a small packet size. |
|
Both in terms of router load but also bandwidth waste. |
|
|
|
2. Software routers are typically not limited by the number of bytes they can route, |
|
but the number of packets. Small packets means more of them, and more load on |
|
software routers. |
|
|
|
The solution to the problem of finding the optimal packet size, is to dynamically |
|
adjust the packet size and search for the largest size that can make it through |
|
without being fragmented along the path. |
|
|
|
To help do this, you can set the DF bit (Don't Fragment) in your Datagrams. This |
|
asks routers that otherwise would fragment packets to instead drop them, and send |
|
back an ICMP message reporting the MTU of the link the packet couldn't fit. With |
|
this message, it's very simple to discover the path MTU. You simply mark your packets |
|
not to be fragmented, and change your packet size whenever you receive the ICMP |
|
packet-too-big message. |
|
|
|
Unfortunately it's not quite that simple. There are a significant number of firewalls |
|
in the wild blocking all ICMP messages. This means we can't rely on them, we also have |
|
to guess that a packet was dropped because of its size. This is done by only marking |
|
certain packets with DF, and if all other packets go through, except for the MTU probes, |
|
we know that we need to lower our packet sizes. |
|
|
|
If we set up bounds for the path MTU (say the minimum internet MTU, 576 and ethernet's 1500), |
|
we can do a binary search for the MTU. This would let us find it in just a few round-trips. |
|
|
|
On top of this, libtorrent has an optimization where it figures out which interface a |
|
uTP connection will be sent over, and initialize the MTU ceiling to that interface's MTU. |
|
This means that a VPN tunnel would advertize its MTU as lower, and the uTP connection would |
|
immediately know to send smaller packets, no search required. It also has the side-effect |
|
of being able to use much larger packet sizes for non-ethernet interfaces or ethernet links |
|
with jumbo frames. |
|
|
|
clock drift |
|
----------- |
|
|
|
.. image:: our_delay_base_thumb.png |
|
:target: our_delay_base.png |
|
:align: right |
|
|
|
Clock drift is clocks progressing at different rates. It's different from clock |
|
skew which means clocks set to different values (but which may progress at the same |
|
rate). |
|
|
|
Any clock drift between the two machines involved in a uTP transfer will result |
|
in systematically inflated or deflated delay measurements. |
|
|
|
This can be solved by letting the base delay be the lowest seen sample in the last |
|
*n* minutes. This is a trade-off between seeing a single packet go straight through |
|
the queue, with no delay, and the amount of clock drift one can assume on normal computers. |
|
|
|
It turns out that it's fairly safe to assume that one of your packets will in fact go |
|
straight through without any significant delay, once every 20 minutes or so. However, |
|
the clock drift between normal computers can be as much as 17 ms in 10 minutes. 17 ms |
|
is quite significant, especially if your target delay is 25 ms (as in the LEDBAT_ spec). |
|
|
|
Clocks progresses at different rates depending on temperature. This means computers |
|
running hot are likely to have a clock drift compared to computers running cool. |
|
|
|
So, by updating the delay base periodically based on the lowest seen sample, you'll either |
|
end up changing it upwards (artificaially making the delay samples appear small) without |
|
the congestion or delay actually having changed, or you'll end up with a significant clock |
|
drift and have artificially low samples because of that. |
|
|
|
The solution to this problem is based on the fact that the clock drift is only a problem |
|
for one of the sides of the connection. Only when your delay measurements keep increasing |
|
is it a problem. If your delay measurements keep decreasing, the samples will simply push |
|
down the delay base along with it. With this in mind, we can simply keep track of the |
|
other end's delay measurements as well, applying the same logic to it. Whenever the |
|
other end's base delay is adjusted downwards, we adjust our base delay upwards by the same |
|
amount. |
|
|
|
This will accurately keep the base delay updated with the clock drift and improve |
|
the delay measurements. The figure on the right shows the absolute timestamp differences |
|
along with the base delay. The slope of the measurements is caused by clock drift. |
|
|
|
For more information on the clock drift compensation, see the slides from BitTorrent's |
|
presentation at IPTPS10_. |
|
|
|
.. _IPTPS10: http://www.usenix.org/event/iptps10/tech/slides/cohen.pdf |
|
.. _LEDBAT: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-ledbat-congestion/ |
|
|
|
features |
|
-------- |
|
|
|
libtorrent's uTP implementation includes the following features: |
|
|
|
* Path MTU discovery, including jumbo frames and detecting restricted |
|
MTU tunnels. Binary search packet sizes to find the largest non-fragmented. |
|
* Selective ACK. The ability to acknowledge individual packets in the |
|
event of packet loss |
|
* Fast resend. The first time a packet is lost, it's resent immediately. |
|
Triggered by duplicate ACKs. |
|
* Nagle's algorithm. Minimize protocol overhead by attempting to lump |
|
full packets of payload together before sending a packet. |
|
* Delayed ACKs to minimize protocol overhead. |
|
* Microsecond resolution timestamps. |
|
* Advertised receive window, to support download rate limiting. |
|
* Correct handling of wrapping sequence numbers. |
|
* Easy configuration of target-delay, gain-factor, timeouts, delayed-ack |
|
and socket buffers. |
|
|
|
|