ID No: 2022ht66096

Name: GAURAV KUMAR JAIN

Degree: MTech - Computing Systems and Infrastructure

Exploratory Case Study: Performance Evaluation of Network Application

in a Wireless Environment
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Abstract
This exploratory case study aims to analyze and compare the performance of network applications
deployed in a wireless environment using different variants of TCP Congestion Control Algorithms,
various MAC (Medium Access Control) Protocols, and routing protocols.

The study will provide insights into the impact of these variables on the application's performance, with
the goal of optimizing network efficiency and reliability.

We will evaluate the performance of these components in terms of throughput, latency, packet loss, and
fairness. The study will explore scenarios that represent real-world network conditions and challenges.

Introduction
In today's world, wireless networks are essential for various applications, including IoT, mobile
communications, and more. To ensure the efficient and reliable operation of these networks, it is crucial
to understand the performance implications of different networking components. This study will focus on
the following aspects:

 TCP Congestion Control Algorithms:

Different TCP congestion control algorithms (e.g., TCP Reno, TCP CUBIC, TCP BBR) affect the
behavior of TCP flows under various network conditions. Understanding their performance
characteristics is essential for optimizing throughput and fairness.

 MAC Protocols:

The MAC protocol defines how devices access the wireless medium. Variants such as IEEE
802.11 (Wi-Fi) and IEEE 802.15.4 (used in Zigbee) have distinct characteristics that influence
network efficiency, contention resolution, and latency.

1
  Routing Protocols:

Routing protocols play a vital role in determining the paths data takes through a network.
Protocols like AODV, DSR, and OSPF have different routing strategies, which can affect
network stability, latency, and resource utilization.

Significance of the Case Study

Understanding the performance of video streaming in wireless networks is crucial for optimizing
user experiences. By examining the impact of TCP Congestion Control Algorithms, MAC
Protocols, and Routing Protocols, we can find ways to enhance video streaming quality, reduce
latency, and ensure reliability. This case study aims to provide practical recommendations for
network administrators and service providers to improve video streaming in wireless
environments.

Chosen Network Application for the case study:-

For this case study, we will focus on the network application of "Video Streaming" deployed in wireless
network environments. Video streaming has become a ubiquitous and critical application, used for
entertainment, education, and communication. It demands high-quality delivery and low latency to
provide a satisfactory user experience.

What is Video Streaming?

Video streaming refers to the real-time transmission of video content over a network, allowing users
to watch videos on-demand without the need for downloading the entire video file. It is a prevalent
and versatile application that serves various purposes, including:

1. Entertainment: Platforms like Netflix, YouTube, and Amazon Prime Video offer a wide range
of movies, TV shows, and user-generated content for entertainment.

2. Education: Educational institutions and e-learning platforms use video streaming to deliver
lectures, tutorials, and training materials to students and learners.

3. Communication: Video conferencing tools, like Zoom and Skype, use video streaming to
facilitate face-to-face communication over the internet.

4. Security: Surveillance cameras and systems often rely on video streaming to monitor areas in
real-time, improving security.

Importance of Video Streaming Quality

Video streaming quality is of paramount importance for a satisfying user experience. Key factors that
influence the quality of video streaming include:

 Resolution: The clarity of the video, usually measured in pixels (e.g., 1080p, 4K).

 Bitrate: The amount of data transmitted per second, affecting video quality and smooth playback.

2
  Latency: The delay between sending and receiving video data, which impacts real-time
interaction in applications like video conferencing and gaming.

 Packet Loss: The percentage of video data packets that are not successfully delivered, leading to
choppy or distorted video.

Challenges in Wireless Networks

Wireless networks, such as Wi-Fi and cellular networks, face specific challenges when it comes
to video streaming:

1. Limited Bandwidth: Wireless networks often have limited bandwidth, which can affect the bit
rate and resolution of video streams.

2. Interference: Wireless signals can experience interference from other devices or environmental
factors, leading to packet loss and reduced quality.

3. Latency: Wireless networks may introduce additional latency compared to wired connections,
impacting real-time applications.

4. Mobility: Users move around in wireless networks, which can lead to changes in signal strength
and quality during video streaming.

Conducting an Exploratory Case Study related to selection

of TCP Congestion Control Algorithms, MAC Protocols,
and Routing Protocols
In this case study, we aim to investigate how different components of a network influence the
performance of video streaming in wireless environments. We'll focus on key aspects:

1. TCP Congestion Control Algorithms

What is TCP Congestion Control?

TCP (Transmission Control Protocol) is a fundamental communication protocol used for reliable
data transfer over networks. TCP Congestion Control is a crucial part of this protocol. It manages
the flow of data to avoid network congestion and ensure efficient data transmission.

Why Study TCP Congestion Control?

 Different TCP Congestion Control Algorithms, such as TCP Reno, TCP CUBIC, and TCP BBR,
handle congestion in diverse ways.

 These algorithms affect how quickly data is transmitted and how well they adapt to changing
network conditions.

3
  Understanding their impact on video streaming helps optimize the quality and reliability of video
streams.

Comparison:

Performance Characteristic TCP Reno TCP CUBIC TCP BBR

Linear growth until congestion detected, Adaptive to available

Congestion Window Control then halves and slowly increases. More aggressive growth bandwidth and RTT

Relies on packet loss as a congestion Aims to avoid packet loss and

Response to Packet Loss indicator. Primarily responds to packet loss. reacts to bandwidth changes.

Designed to minimize latency.

Moderate latency due to response to packet Potential higher latency in some Suitable for real-time
Latency loss. cases. applications.

Can be less fair to other flows, May not be as fair to other

especially in high-capacity flows in shared network
Fairness Generally considered fair to other flows. networks. environments.

Higher throughput in high- Low latency and efficient use

Advantages Fair and stable performance. bandwidth networks. of available bandwidth.

Minimized packet loss and

Compatibility with various network responsive to changing
conditions. Widely supported. network conditions.

Suitable for real-time

Suitable for diverse network environments. applications.

Potential fairness issues can

Slower response to network congestion and monopolize bandwidth in high- May be less fair to other flows
Disadvantages potential packet loss. capacity networks. in shared networks.

More complex to implement

Slower in adapting to changing network Potentially higher latency in some and configure than older
conditions. scenarios. algorithms.

May not efficiently utilize available May not be ideal for real-time
bandwidth. applications requiring low latency.

Methodology for TCP Congestion Control Evaluation:

 We can set up test scenarios that mimic real-world network conditions.

4
  These scenarios will include variations in network congestion levels and latency, which can affect
video streaming quality.

 We can measure the performance of each algorithm in terms of throughput (data transfer speed),
latency (delay in data transmission), packet loss (data packets that do not reach the destination),
and fairness (equal sharing of network resources among users).

2. MAC Protocols (Medium Access Control)

What Are MAC Protocols?

MAC Protocols are a set of rules governing how devices in a wireless network access the shared
communication medium (e.g., the airwaves in Wi-Fi networks). These protocols determine when
and how devices can transmit data.

Why Study MAC Protocols?

 Different MAC Protocols, like IEEE 802.11 (Wi-Fi) and IEEE 802.15.4 (Zigbee), have distinct
characteristics.

 They influence how devices contend for access to the wireless medium and impact network
performance.

Comparison:

IEEE 802.11 (Wi-Fi):

Performance Characteristics:

 Network Range: IEEE 802.11 (Wi-Fi) is commonly used for medium-range to long-range
wireless communication, making it suitable for home and enterprise environments.

 Data Throughput: Wi-Fi offers higher data throughput, especially in its latest iterations (e.g.,
Wi-Fi 6 and Wi-Fi 6E), making it suitable for applications that require higher bandwidth, such as
video streaming and gaming.

 Frequency Bands: Wi-Fi operates in both the 2.4 GHz and 5 GHz frequency bands, which
provides flexibility in avoiding interference and congestion.

 Scalability: Wi-Fi networks can accommodate a large number of devices, making it suitable for
environments with high device density.

Advantages:

 Higher Data Throughput: Wi-Fi provides faster data transmission rates, which is beneficial for
data-intensive applications.

 Wide Adoption: It is a widely adopted standard with extensive support and compatibility.

5
  Longer Range: Wi-Fi typically offers longer-range coverage, which is suitable for larger areas.

Disadvantages:

 Higher Power Consumption: Wi-Fi tends to consume more power compared to low-power
protocols like IEEE 802.15.4, which can be a concern for battery-operated devices.

 Potential Interference: Wi-Fi operates in crowded frequency bands, making it susceptible to

interference from other devices.

 Complexity: Setting up and managing Wi-Fi networks can be more complex and may require
more significant configuration.

IEEE 802.15.4 (used in Zigbee):

Performance Characteristics:

 Low Power Consumption: IEEE 802.15.4 is designed for low-power, battery-efficient

communication, making it suitable for IoT and sensor networks.

 Short Range: It is typically used for short-range communication, with a range of up to 10 meters.
This is ideal for applications within a confined area.

 Data Throughput: IEEE 802.15.4 offers lower data throughput compared to Wi-Fi, but it is
sufficient for many IoT and sensor applications.

 Frequency Bands: IEEE 802.15.4 operates in the 2.4 GHz ISM band, which is a widely used and
unlicensed frequency range.

Advantages:

 Low Power Consumption: IEEE 802.15.4 is highly energy-efficient, making it suitable for
battery-operated devices with long operational lifetimes.

 Short Range: The short-range communication is ideal for applications within confined spaces,
such as home automation.

 Less Susceptible to Interference: It operates in a less crowded frequency band, reducing the
chances of interference.

Disadvantages:

 Limited Data Throughput: IEEE 802.15.4 offers lower data throughput, which may not be
suitable for applications requiring high data rates.

 Range Limitation: Its short range is a limitation in scenarios where devices are spread over a
larger area.

 Scalability: It may not scale well in environments with a high density of devices.

6
Comparison in MAC Protocols:

 Range: Wi-Fi offers a longer range, making it suitable for larger areas, while IEEE 802.15.4 is
designed for short-range communication.

 Data Throughput: Wi-Fi provides higher data throughput, while IEEE 802.15.4 offers lower
data rates but is optimized for low power.

 Power Consumption: IEEE 802.15.4 is significantly more energy-efficient, making it suitable

for battery-operated devices.

 Complexity: Wi-Fi networks tend to be more complex to set up and manage, while IEEE
802.15.4 is simpler, particularly in small-scale applications.

 Interference: Wi-Fi is more susceptible to interference in crowded frequency bands, while IEEE
802.15.4 operates in a less congested range.

Methodology for MAC Protocol Evaluation:

 We can set up test scenarios that mimic real-world network conditions.

 This will simulate contention, where devices compete for the chance to transmit data.

 We can evaluate how each MAC Protocol affects video streaming performance, including
throughput, latency, and fairness among users.

3. Routing Protocols
What Are Routing Protocols?

Routing Protocols determine the paths that data packets take through a network. They are
responsible for selecting the most efficient routes and maintaining them.

Why Study Routing Protocols?

 Different routing protocols, such as AODV, DSR, and OSPF, employ various strategies for
routing data.

 The choice of routing protocol can significantly impact network stability, latency, and resource
utilization.

Comparison:

AODV (Ad Hoc On- DSR (Dynamic Source OSPF (Open Shortest
Performance Characteristic Demand Distance Vector) Routing) Path First)

7
 Proactive (link-state)
Routing Approach Reactive routing Reactive routing routing

Lower route discovery Lower route discovery Higher route discovery

Route Discovery Overhead overhead overhead overhead

Suitable for small to medium- Suitable for small to Suitable for medium to
sized networks or mobile ad- medium-sized networks or large networks including
Scalability hoc networks mobile ad-hoc networks the internet

Adapts well to dynamic Adapts well to dynamic Better suited for stable
network topologies and network topologies and and well connected
Adaptability mobile environments mobile environments networks

Advantages Disadvantages

AODV (Ad Hoc On-

Demand Distance Less Overhead: Reduced route discovery
Vector) overhead. Route Discovery Delay: May introduce delay.

Adaptability: Adapts well to dynamic network Not Ideal for Large Networks: Less suitable
topologies and mobile environments. for large networks.

Source Routing Overhead: Including the

DSR (Dynamic complete route in packet headers can introduce
Source Routing) - Reduced Route Discovery Overhead. overhead.

Not Ideal for Large Networks: May not scale

- Simplicity of Implementation. well for large networks.

Adaptability: Adapts well to dynamic network

topologies and mobile environments.

8
OSPF (Open Shortest - Efficient Route Calculation and Convergence - Complexity of Configuration and
Path First) Time. Management: More

complex to configure and manage than

- Scalability for Larger, Complex Networks distance vector protocols.

Network Overhead Due to Flooding: The

flooding of link state information can
introduce network overhead.

Methodology for Routing Protocol Evaluation:

 We will set up network scenarios with different topologies.

 Various routing protocols will be implemented to observe their performance.

 We will analyze the routing convergence times (how quickly routes are established), path
selection, and route maintenance for video streaming.

Impact of network congestion, packet loss, and latency on the

performance of TCP Congestion Control Algorithms, MAC
Protocols, and Routing Protocols

TCP Congestion Control

Impact Factor MAC Protocols Routing Protocols
Algorithms

Network Congestion
TCP Reno responds by
reducing its congestion
window, leading to slower
data transmission and
buffering.
MAC Protocols influence how
devices contend for the
wireless medium during
congestion. Contentious MAC
Protocols may introduce
additional delays during
collisions and contention.
Routing protocols can impact
how data is forwarded during
congestion. Inefficient routing
decisions may lead to network
bottlenecks and delays.

9
 TCP CUBIC May temporarily
monopolizes available
bandwidth, affecting fairness
in the network.

TCP BBR aims to minimize

latency and avoid causing
congestion, which helps
maintain a smoother video
streaming experience.

Packet loss is considered a Inefficient contention Routing decisions can affect

signal of network congestion.
TCP Reno and TCP CUBIC
react to packet loss by
Packet Loss reducing transmission rates,
causing a reduction in video
quality and buffering.
algorithms in MAC protocols the path packets take through
may lead to higher packet the network. Suboptimal
loss, affecting video streaming routing decisions may lead to
quality. increased packet loss.

TCP BBR aims to minimize

packet loss, performing better
in video streaming
applications by avoiding
congestion-related packet loss.

High latency can lead to
buffering and delays in video
playback. TCP BBR is
designed to minimize latency,
Latency performing better in such
scenarios.
MAC Protocols can influence
latency due to contention
resolution and channel access.
Lower-latency MAC protocols
reduce the delay in data
transmission.
The efficiency of routing
protocols in establishing and
maintaining routes can affect
network latency. Faster
convergence and route
selection can reduce overall
network latency, benefiting
video streaming.

Recommendations for network optimization based on the

findings of the case study
Based on the findings of the case study, the choice of TCP Congestion Control Algorithms, MAC
Protocols, and Routing Protocols for network optimization in a video streaming application can be guided
by the following recommendations:

TCP Congestion Control Algorithms:

10
 1. TCP BBR: Given its ability to minimize latency and efficiently use available bandwidth,
consider using TCP BBR as the primary TCP Congestion Control Algorithm. It's well-suited for
real-time applications like video streaming, where low latency and smooth playback are essential.

2. TCP Reno: While TCP Reno is a stable and fair choice, it may not be the best for applications
with stringent latency requirements. Consider using it as an alternative or fallback option when
network conditions are not suitable for TCP BBR.

MAC Protocols:

1. Low-Latency MAC Protocol: Choose a MAC Protocol that minimizes latency and contention,
as this is crucial for video streaming applications. Protocols like Wi-Fi (802.11e) with Quality of
Service (QoS) support can prioritize video traffic and reduce latency.

2. Efficient Channel Access: Ensure that the MAC Protocol provides efficient channel access
mechanisms to reduce contention and packet collisions, thus improving the overall quality of
video streaming.

Routing Protocols:

1. Efficient Routing Protocol: Select a routing protocol that minimizes network overhead and
offers efficient route calculation. OSPF, while more complex, can be a good choice for larger and
stable networks where efficient routing is critical.

2. Dynamic Routing Adaptability: If your network is dynamic or includes mobile devices,

consider routing protocols like AODV or DSR. These are reactive and adapt well to changes in
network topology, making them suitable for video streaming in mobile environments.

3. QoS Support: Ensure that the chosen routing protocol supports Quality of Service (QoS)
mechanisms. This allows you to prioritize video traffic and ensure a better streaming experience.

4. Load Balancing: Implement load balancing and route optimization techniques to distribute
traffic efficiently and prevent network congestion, which can negatively impact video streaming.

In summary, for network optimization in a video streaming application, prioritize low-latency MAC
protocols and TCP BBR as the primary congestion control algorithm. Select routing protocols that are
efficient, adaptable to network changes, and support QoS mechanisms. Additionally, implement load
balancing strategies to ensure smooth video streaming, especially in dynamic or mobile environments.

Future research directions in the area of network

optimization
Future research directions in network optimization for video streaming applications in both wired and
wireless environments should focus on addressing emerging challenges and improving the quality of
service. Here are some key areas for future research:

1. 5G and Beyond:

11
Investigate the impact of 5G and future wireless technologies on video streaming. Examine how low-
latency, high-bandwidth, and network slicing capabilities can enhance video quality and interactivity.

2. Edge Computing:

Explore the potential of edge computing for video delivery. Investigate how edge servers can reduce
latency and improve content delivery, especially for real-time and interactive video applications.

3. Quality of Experience (QoE):

Research methods to measure and optimize the Quality of Experience (QoE) for video streaming.
Develop new QoE metrics and techniques for objective evaluation of video quality.

4. Machine Learning and AI:

Investigate the application of machine learning and artificial intelligence in optimizing video streaming
networks. Develop AI-driven algorithms for adaptive video streaming and predictive network
management.

5. Content Delivery Networks (CDNs):

Explore advanced CDN architectures and strategies for efficient video content delivery. Optimize CDN
selection and placement for various network conditions and device types.

6. Adaptive Streaming:

Enhance adaptive streaming algorithms to better adapt to varying network conditions, ensuring smoother
transitions between quality levels and reducing buffering.

7. Network Slicing:

Study the implementation and optimization of network slicing to allocate network resources dynamically
for different video streaming services based on their specific requirements.

8. Low-Latency Protocols:

Develop and evaluate new low-latency transport protocols and architectures to improve real-time video
streaming, such as for telemedicine applications.

9. Wireless Mesh Networks:

Investigate the use of wireless mesh networks for video streaming in challenging environments, such as
disaster recovery scenarios or remote areas with limited infrastructure.

10. Security and Privacy:

Research security mechanisms to protect video streams and user data, especially in wireless environments
where security risks are more pronounced.

11. Network Virtualization:

12
Explore the benefits of network virtualization for optimizing video streaming services. Virtualized
networks can be dynamically adjusted to meet changing demands.

12. Energy-Efficient Streaming:

Focus on developing energy-efficient video streaming solutions, especially for battery-powered devices in
IoT and mobile applications.

13. Multi-Access Edge Computing (MEC):

Investigate how Multi-Access Edge Computing can be used to optimize video delivery by processing
video content closer to the end-user.

14. Cross-Layer Optimization:

Explore cross-layer optimization techniques that coordinate video encoding, network transport, and
application-level adaptations for better video streaming performance.

These research directions will play a significant role in improving the efficiency, quality, and adaptability
of video streaming networks, ensuring a better user experience and expanding the capabilities of video
streaming in both wired and wireless environments.

13