Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

When to use and when not to use BBR: An empirical analysis and evaluation study

  • Stony Brook University

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingConference contributionpeer-review

72 Scopus citations

Abstract

This short paper presents a detailed empirical study of BBR's performance under different real-world and emulated testbeds across a range of network operating conditions. Our empirical results help to identify network conditions under which BBR outperforms, in terms of goodput, contemporary TCP congestion control algorithms. We find that BBR is well suited for networks with shallow buffers, despite its high retransmissions, whereas existing loss-based algorithms are better suited for deep buffers. To identify the root causes of BBR's limitations, we carefully analyze our empirical results. Our analysis reveals that, contrary to BBR's design goal, BBR often exhibits large queue sizes. Further, the regimes where BBR performs well are often the same regimes where BBR is unfair to competing flows. Finally, we demonstrate the existence of a loss rate “cliff point” beyond which BBR's goodput drops abruptly. Our empirical investigation identifies the likely culprits in each of these cases as specific design options in BBR's source code.

Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationIMC 2019 - Proceedings of the 2019 ACM Internet Measurement Conference
PublisherAssociation for Computing Machinery
Pages130-136
Number of pages7
ISBN (Electronic)9781450369480
DOIs
StatePublished - Oct 21 2019
Event19th ACM Internet Measurement Conference, IMC 2019 - Amsterdam, Netherlands
Duration: Oct 21 2019Oct 23 2019

Publication series

NameProceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Internet Measurement Conference, IMC

Conference

Conference19th ACM Internet Measurement Conference, IMC 2019
Country/TerritoryNetherlands
CityAmsterdam
Period10/21/1910/23/19

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'When to use and when not to use BBR: An empirical analysis and evaluation study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this