Updating the Theory of Buffer Sizing
Bruce Spang, Serhat Arslan, Nick McKeown

TL;DR
This paper revises buffer sizing guidelines for routers, accounting for modern congestion control algorithms like Cubic and BBR, and provides empirical validation for the updated rules.
Contribution
It generalizes existing buffer sizing rules to modern algorithms and validates these through real network measurements.
Findings
Buffers can be 60-75% smaller with newer algorithms.
The square root of n rule holds under broader conditions.
Situations with unfair flows or ECN may violate the rule.
Abstract
Routers have packet buffers to reduce packet drops during times of congestion. It is important to correctly size the buffer: make it too small, and packets are dropped unnecessarily and the link may be underutilized; make it too big, and packets may wait for a long time, and the router itself may be more expensive to build. Despite its importance, there are few guidelines for picking the buffer size. The two most well-known rules only apply to long-lived TCP Reno flows; either for a network carrying a single TCP Reno flow (the buffer size should equal the bandwidth-delay product, or ) or for a network carrying TCP Reno flows (the buffer size should equal ). Since these rules were introduced, TCP Reno has been replaced by newer algorithms as the default congestion control algorithm in all major operating systems, yet little has been written about how the rules need…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Code & Models
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsNetwork Traffic and Congestion Control · Software-Defined Networks and 5G · Advanced Optical Network Technologies
