F5 Unveils New Built-In TCP Profiles
[Update 3/17: Some representative performance results are at the bottom] Longtime readers know that F5's built-in TCP profiles were in need of a refresh. I'm pleased to announce that in TMOS® version 13.0, available now, there are substantial improvements to the built-in profile scheme. Users expect defaults to reflect best common practice, and we've made a huge step towards that being true. New Built-in Profiles We've kept virtually all of the old built-in profiles, for those of you who are happy with them, or have built other profiles that derive from them. But there are four new ones to load directly into your virtual servers or use a basis for your own tuning. The first three are optimized for particular network use cases: f5-tcp-wan, f5-tcp-lan, and f5-tcp-mobile are updated versions of tcp-wan-optimized, tcp-lan-optimized, and tcp-mobile-optimized. These adapt all settings to the appropriate link types, except that they don't enable the very newest features. If the hosts you're communicating with tend to use one kind of link, these are a great choice. The fourth is f5-tcp-progressive. This is meant to be a general-use profile (like the tcp default), but it contains the very latest features for early adopters. In our benchmark testing, we had the following criteria: f5-tcp-wan, f5-tcp-lan, and f5-tcp-mobile achieved throughput at least as high, and often better, than the default tcp profile for that link type. f5-tcp-progressive had equal or higher throughput than default TCP across all representative network types. The relative performance of f5-tcp-wan/lan/mobile and progressive in each link type will vary given the new features that f5-tcp-progressive enables. Living, Read-Only Profiles These four new profiles, and the default 'tcp' profile, are now "living." This means that we'll continually update them with best practices as they evolve. Brand-new features, if they are generally applicable, will immediately appear in f5-tcp-progressive. For our more conservative users, these new features will appear in the other four living profiles after a couple of releases. The default tcp profile hasn't changed yet, but it will in future releases! These five profiles are also now read-only, meaning that to make modifications you'll have to create a new profile that descends from these. This will aid in troubleshooting. If there are any settings that you like so much that you never want them to change, simply click the "custom" button in the child profile and the changes we push out in the future won't affect your settings. How This Affects Your Existing Custom Profiles If you've put thought into your TCP profiles, we aren't going to mess with it. If your profile descends from any of the previous built-ins besides default 'tcp,' there is no change to settings whatsoever. Upgrades to 13.0 will automatically prevent disruptions to your configuration. We've copied all of the default tcp profile settings to tcp-legacy, which is not a "living" profile. All of the old built-in profiles (like tcp-wan-optimized), and any custom profiles descended from default tcp, will now descend instead from tcp-legacy, and never change due to upgrades from F5. tcp-legacy will also include any modifications you made to the default tcp profile, as this profile is not read-only. Our data shows that few, if any, users are using the current (TMOS 12.1 and before) tcp-legacy settings.If you are, it is wise to make a note of those settings before you upgrade. How This Affects Your Existing Virtual Servers As the section above describes, if your virtual server uses any profile other than default 'tcp' or tcp-legacy, there will be no settings change at all. Given the weaknesses of the current default settings, we believe most users who use virtuals with the TCP default are not carefully considering their settings. Those virtuals will continue to use the default profile, and therefore settings will begin to evolve as we modernize the default profile in 13.1 and later releases. If you very much like the default TCP profile, perhaps because you customized it when it wasn't read-only, you should manually change the virtual to use tcp-legacy with no change in behavior. Use the New Profiles for Better Performance The internet changes. Bandwidths increase, we develop better algorithms to automatically tune your settings, and the TCP standard itself evolves. If you use the new profile framework, you'll keep up with the state of the art and maximize the throughput your applications receive. Below, I've included some throughput measurements from our in-house testing. We used parameters representative of seven different link types and measured the throughput using some relevant built-in profiles. Obviously, the performance in your deployment may vary. Aside from LANs, where frankly tuning isn't all that hard, the benefits are pretty clear.
Packet based load balancing instead of connection based (default)
Hi everyone, I have a requirement to load balance iso 8583 echo messages across two servers in a pool. I used a performance Layer 4 virtual server to attempt achieving this because I reckon that is the type of virtual server that could fulfill the requirements of load balancing all the requests across the 2 servers in the pool. However, requests are only being sent to one pool member. I also tried to craft an iRule (see below) to do this, still requests are only sent to one pool member. when CLIENT_ACCEPTED { log local0. "ACCEPTED !!" TCP::collect } when CLIENT_DATA { log local0. "DATA !!" #to get the length of messagein hexadecimal,the length info can be get from the first 2 byte binary scan [TCP::payload] H4 len log local0. $len #convertlentodecimal scan $len %x len log local0. $len #totalmessage length is length + 2 set len [expr { $len + 2} ] if {[TCP::payload length] < $len} { TCP::collect [expr {$len - [TCP::payload length]}] return } TCP::release $len TCP::notify request TCP::collect } when LB_SELECTED { log local0. [LB::server] } when SERVER_CONNECTED { log local0. "Server Connected !!" TCP::collect } when SERVER_DATA { log local0. "response: [TCP::payload]" TCP::release TCP::notify response TCP::collect } Has anyone done packet-based load balancing before? Any ideas?Tuning the TCP Profile, Part One
A few months ago I pointed out some problems with the existing F5-provided TCP profiles, especially the default one. Today I'll begin a pass through the (long) TCP profile to point out the latest thinking on how to get the most performance for your applications. We'll go in the order you see these profile options in the GUI. But first, a note about programmability: in many cases below, I'm going to ask you to generalize about the clients or servers you interact with, and the nature of the paths to those hosts. In a perfect world, we'd detect that stuff automatically and set it for you, and in fact we're rolling that out setting by setting. In the meantime, you can customize your TCP parameters on a per-connection basis using iRules for many of the settings described below, something I'll explain further where applicable. In general, when I refer to "performance" below, I'm referring to the speed at which your customer gets her data. Performance can also refer to the scalability of your application delivery due to CPU and memory limitations, and when that's what I mean, I'll say so. Timer Management The one here with a big performance impact is Minimum RTO. When TCP computes its Retransmission Timeout (RTO), it takes the average measured Round Trip Time (RTT) and adds a few standard deviations to make sure it doesn't falsely detect loss. (False detections have very negative performance implications.) But if RTT is low and stable that RTO may be too low, and the minimum is designed to catch known fluctuations in RTT that the connection may not have observed. Set Minimum RTO too low, and TCP may improperly enter congestion response and reduce the sending rate all the way down to one packet per round trip. Set it too high, and TCP sits idle when it ought to retransmit lost data. So what's the right value? Obviously, if you have a sense of the maximum RTT to your clients (which you can get with the ping command), that's a floor for your value. Furthermore, many clients and servers will implement some sort of Delayed ACK, which reduces ACK volume by sometimes holding them back for up to 200ms to see if it can aggregate more data in the ACK. RFC 5681 actually allows delays of up to 500ms, but this is less common. So take the maximum RTT and add 200 to 500 ms. Another group of settings aren't really about throughput, but to help clients and servers to close gracefully, at the cost of consuming some system resources. Long Close Wait, Fin Wait 1, Fin Wait 2, and Time Wait timers will keep connection state alive to make sure the remote host got all the connection close messages. Enabling Reset On Timeout sends a message that tells the peer to tear down the connection. Similarly, disabling Time Wait Recycle will prevent new connections from using the same address/port combination, making sure that the old connection with that combination gets a full close. The last group of settings keeps possibly dead connections alive, using system resources to maintain state in case they come back to life. Idle Timeout and Zero Window Timeout commit resources until the timer expires. If you set Keep Alive Interval to a value less than the Idle Timeout, then on the clientside BIG-IP will keep the connection alive as long as the client keeps responding to keepalive and the server doesn't terminate the connection itself. In theory, this could be forever! Memory Management In terms of high throughput performance, you want all of these settings to be as large as possible up to a point. The tradeoff is that setting them too high may waste memory and reduce the number of supportable concurrent connections. I say "may" waste because these are limits on memory use, and BIG-IP doesn't allocate the memory until it needs it for buffered data. Even so, the trick is to set the limits large enough that there are no performance penalties, but no larger. Send Buffer and Receive Window are easy to set in principle, but can be tricky in practice. For both, answer these questions: What is the maximum bandwidth (Bytes/second) that BIG-IP might experience sending or receiving? Out of all paths data might travel, what minimum delay among those paths is the highest? (What is the "maximum of the minimums"?) Then you simply multiply Bytes/second by seconds of delay to get a number of bytes. This is the maximum amount of data that TCP ought to have in flight at any one time, which should be enough to prevent TCP connections from idling for lack of memory. If your application doesn't involve sending or receiving much data on that side of the proxy, you can probably get away with lowering the corresponding buffer size to save on memory. For example, a traditional HTTP proxy's clientside probably can afford to have a smaller receive buffer if memory-constrained. There are three principles to follow in setting Proxy Buffer Limits: Proxy Buffer High should be at least as big as the Send Buffer. Otherwise, if a large ACK clears the send buffer all at once there may be less data available than TCP can send. Proxy Buffer Low should be at least as big as the Receive Window on the peer TCP profile (i.e. for the clientside profile, use the receive window on the serverside profile). If not, when the peer connection exits the zero-window state, new data may not arrive before BIG-IP sends all the data it has. Proxy Buffer High should be significantly larger than Proxy Buffer Low (we like to use a 64 KB gap) to avoid constant flapping to and from the zero-window state on the receive side. Obviously, figuring out bandwidth and delay before a deployment can be tricky. This is a place where some iRule mojo can really come in handy. The TCP::rtt and TCP::bandwidth* commands can give you estimates of both quantities you need, even though the RTT isn't a minimum RTT. Alternatively, if you've enabled cmetrics-cache in the profile, you can also obtain historical data for a destination using the ROUTE::cwnd* command, which is a good (possibly low) guess at the value you should plug into the send and receive buffers. You can then set buffer limits directly using TCP::sendbuf**, TCP::recvwnd**, and TCP::proxybuffer**. Getting this to work very well will be difficult, and I don't have any examples where someone worked it through and proved a benefit. But if your application travels highly varied paths and you have the inclination to tinker, you could end up with an optimized configuration. If not, set the buffer sizes using conservatively high inputs and carry on. *These iRule commands only supported in TMOS® version 12.0.0 and later. **These iRule commands only supported in TMOS® version 11.6.0 and later.Investigating the LTM TCP Profile: Congestion Control Algorithms
Introduction The LTM TCP profile has over thirty settings that can be manipulated to enhance the experience between client and server. Because the TCP profile is applied to the virtual server, the flexibility exists to customize the stack (in both client & server directions) for every application delivered by the LTM. In this series, we will dive into several of the configurable options and discuss the pros and cons of their inclusion in delivering applications. Nagle's Algorithm Max Syn Retransmissions & Idle Timeout Windows & Buffers Timers QoS Slow Start Congestion Control Algorithms Acknowledgements Extended Congestion Notification & Limited Transmit Recovery The Finish Line Quick aside for those unfamiliar with TCP: the transmission control protocol (layer 4) rides on top of the internet protocol (layer 3) and is responsible for establishing connections between clients and servers so data can be exchanged reliably between them. Normal TCP communication consists of a client and a server, a 3-way handshake, reliable data exchange, and a four-way close. With the LTM as an intermediary in the client/server architecture, the session setup/teardown is duplicated, with the LTM playing the role of server to the client and client to the server. These sessions are completely independent, even though the LTM can duplicate the tcp source port over to the server side connection in most cases, and depending on your underlying network architecture, can also duplicate the source IP. Definitions cwnd -- congestion window; sender-side limitation on the amount of data that can be sent rwnd -- receive window; receiver-side limitation on the amount of data that can be received ssthresh -- slow start threshold; value at which tcp toggles between slow start and congestion avoidance Flightsize -- sent amount of unacknowledged data SMSS -- sender max segment size; largest segment the sender can transmit, based on MTU - overhead, path MTU discovery, or RMSS. RMSS -- receiver max segment size; largest segment the receiver is willing to accept. Congestion Control In modern TCP implementations (Reno forward), the main congestion control mechanism consists of four algorithms: slow start, congestion avoidance, fast retransmit, and fast recover. RFC 1122 required the first two (respectively), and the latter were introduced with BSD version 4.3, code name Reno. The tcp implementation (detailed in RFC 2851) in Reno has adopted that code name. New Reno introduces a slight modification to the fast recover algorithm in Reno in the absence of selective acknowledgements and is detailed in RFC 2852. Note that if selective acknowledgements are enabled in the profile, there will be no functional difference between Reno and New Reno. That said, the differences between Reno and New Reno (as defined in RFC 2852) are highlighted in the following table. The bold/italic print in the New Reno column below indicates the departure from the Reno standard. Note that the New Reno fast recover algorithm implemented on the LTM is the careful variant of New Reno and is defined in RFC 3782. It's a little more complex and therefore isn't show above for clarity in distinguishing the differences between Reno and New Reno. The careful variant attempts to avoid unnecessary multiple fast retransmits that can occur after a timeout. All LTM version 9.x releases prior to 9.4 implement the careful variant of New Reno. Beginning in version 9.4, you can optionally select Reno, New Reno, High Speed, or Scalable. Highspeed is based on Reno, and Scalable is a variant of High Speed. Congestion Window During congestion avoidance, the congestion window is set differently among the available options: Reno/New Reno ACK ==> cwnd = cwnd + (1/cwnd) LOSS ==> cwnd = cwnd - (cwnd/2) High Speed ACK ==> cwnd = cwnd + (a(cwnd)/cwnd) LOSS ==> cwnd = cwnd - (cwnd * b(cwnd)) Scalable ACK ==> cwnd = cwnd + .01 LOSS ==> cwnd = cwnd * 0.875 With Reno (or stock, standard, normal, etc) TCP, cwnd increases by one packet every round trip. When congestion is detected, cwnd is halved. For long fat networks, the optimal cwnd size could be 10000 packets. This means recovery will take at least 5000 round trips, and on a 100 ms link, that means a recovery time of 500 seconds (yeah, you read that right!). The goals of High Speed and Scalable are similar (Sustain high speeds without requiring unrealistically low loss rates, reach high speed quickly in slow start, recover from congestion without huge delays, fair treatment of standard TCP) but the approaches are different. The High Speed implementation alters cwnd up or down as a function of the size of the window. If cwnd is small, High Speed is switched off and behaves like Reno. Cwnd grows larger and shrinks smaller than with Reno. This results in better utilization (overall and early in a connection) on long fat networks. The Scalable implementation has a multiplicative increase, unlike Reno/New Reno and High Speed. It's loss recovery mechanism is independent of the congestion window and is therefore much quicker than normal (some studies show recovery as quick as 2.7 seconds even on gigabit links). The performance improvements with High Speed and Scalable can be huge for bulk transfers, perhaps doubled or greater. Throughput results (condensed from http://www-iepm.slac.stanford.edu/monitoring/bulk/fast/) based on a transmit queue length of 100 and an MTU of 1500 are shown in the table below. Throughput Results (condensed) TCP Implementation Mbps (after 80s) Mbps (after 1000s) Reno 56 128 Scalable 387 551 High Speed 881 913 Conclusion Since the arrival of LTM version 9.4, you have been armed with the option to increase the performance of your TCP stack significantly, while maintaining compatibility with the standard implementations. Testing is always encouraged, as every scenario welcomes additional challenges that must be solved.Investigating the LTM TCP Profile: The Finish Line
Introduction The LTM TCP profile has over thirty settings that can be manipulated to enhance the experience between client and server. Because the TCP profile is applied to the virtual server, the flexibility exists to customize the stack (in both client & server directions) for every application delivered by the LTM. In this series, we will dive into several of the configurable options and discuss the pros and cons of their inclusion in delivering applications. Nagle's Algorithm Max Syn Retransmissions & Idle Timeout Windows & Buffers Timers QoS Slow Start Congestion Control Algorithms Acknowledgements Extended Congestion Notification & Limited Transmit Recovery The Finish Line Quick aside for those unfamiliar with TCP: the transmission control protocol (layer 4) rides on top of the internet protocol (layer 3) and is responsible for establishing connections between clients and servers so data can be exchanged reliably between them. Normal TCP communication consists of a client and a server, a 3-way handshake, reliable data exchange, and a four-way close. With the LTM as an intermediary in the client/server architecture, the session setup/teardown is duplicated, with the LTM playing the role of server to the client and client to the server. These sessions are completely independent, even though the LTM can duplicate the tcp source port over to the server-side connection in most cases, and depending on your underlying network architecture, can also duplicate the source IP. Deferred Accept Disabled by default, this option defers the allocation of resources to the connection until payload is received from the client. It is useful in dealing with three-way handshake DoS attacks, and delays the allocation of server-side resources until necessary, but delaying the accept could impact the latency of the server responses, especially if OneConnect is disabled. Bandwidth Delay This setting, enabled by default, specifies that the tcp stack tries to calculate the optimal bandwidth based on round-trip time and historical throughput. This product would then help determine the optimal congestion window without first exceeding the available bandwidth. Proxy MSS & Options These settings signal the LTM to only use the MSS and options negotiated with the client on the server-side of the connection. Disabled by default, enabling them doesn't allow the LTM to properly isolate poor TCP performance on one side of the connection nor does it enable the LTM to offload the client or server. The scenarios for these options are rare and should be utilized sparingly. Examples: troubleshooting performance problems isolated to the server, or if there is a special case for negotiating TCP options end to end. Appropriate Byte Counting Defined in RFC 3465, this option calculates the increase ot the congestion window on the number of previously unacknowledged bytes that each ACK covers. This option is enabled by default, and it is recommended for it to remain enabled. Advantages: more appropriately increases the congestion window, mitigates the impact of delayed and lost acknowledgements, and prevents attacks from misbehaving receivers. Disadvantages include an increase in burstiness and a small increase in the overall loss rate (directly related to the increased aggressiveness) Congestion Metrics Cache This option is enabled by default and signals the LTM to use route metrics to the peer for initializing the congestion window. This improves the initial slow-start ramp for previously encountered peers as the congestion information is already known and cached. If the majority of the client base is sourced from rapidly changing and unstable routing infrastructures, disabling this option ensures that the LTM will not use bad information leading to wrong behavior upon the initial connection. Conclusion This concludes our trip through the TCP profile, I hope you've enjoyed the ride. I'd like to thank the developers, UnRuleY in particular, for their help along the way. Update: This series is a decade+ old. Still relevant, but Martin Duke wrote a series of articles on the TCP profile as well with updates and considerations you should read up on as well.Investigating the LTM TCP Profile: ECN & LTR
Introduction The LTM TCP profile has over thirty settings that can be manipulated to enhance the experience between client and server. Because the TCP profile is applied to the virtual server, the flexibility exists to customize the stack (in both client & server directions) for every application delivered by the LTM. In this series, we will dive into several of the configurable options and discuss the pros and cons of their inclusion in delivering applications. Nagle's Algorithm Max Syn Retransmissions & Idle Timeout Windows & Buffers Timers QoS Slow Start Congestion Control Algorithms Acknowledgements Extended Congestion Notification & Limited Transmit Recovery The Finish Line Quick aside for those unfamiliar with TCP: the transmission control protocol (layer 4) rides on top of the internet protocol (layer 3) and is responsible for establishing connections between clients and servers so data can be exchanged reliably between them. Normal TCP communication consists of a client and a server, a 3-way handshake, reliable data exchange, and a four-way close. With the LTM as an intermediary in the client/server architecture, the session setup/teardown is duplicated, with the LTM playing the role of server to the client and client to the server. These sessions are completely independent, even though the LTM can duplicate the tcp source port over to the server-side connection in most cases, and depending on your underlying network architecture, can also duplicate the source IP. Extended Congestion Notification The extended congestion notification option available in the TCP profile by default is disabled. ECN is another option in TCP that must be negotiated at start time between peers. Support is not widely adopted yet and the effective use of this feature relies heavily on the underlying infrastructures handling of the ECN bits as routers must participate in the process. If you recall from the QoS tech tip, the IP TOS field has 8 bits, the first six for DSCP, and the final two for ECN. DSCP ECN Codepoints DSCP ECN Comments X X X X X X 0 0 Not-ECT X X X X X X 0 1 ECT(1) ECN-capable X X X X X X 1 0 ECT(0) ECN-capable X X X X X X 1 1 CE Congestion Experienced Routers implementing ECN RED (random early detection) will mark ECN-capable packets and drop Not-ECT packets (only under congestion and only by the policies configured on the router). If ECN is enabled, the presence of the ECE (ECN-Echo) bit will trigger the TCP stack to halve its congestion window and reduce the slow start threshold (cwnd and ssthresh, respectively...remember these?) just as if the packet had been dropped. The benefits of enabling ECN are reducing/avoiding drops where they normally would occur and reducing packet delay due to shorter queues. Another benefit is that the TCP peers can distinguish between transmission loss and congestion signals. However, due to the nature of this tightly integrated relationship between routers and tcp peers, unless you control the infrastructure or have agreements in place to its expected behavior, I wouldn't recommend enabling this feature as there are several ways to subvert ECN (you can read up on it in RFC 3168). Limited Transmit Recovery Defined in RFC 3042, Limited Transmit Recovery allows the sender to transmit new data after the receipt of the second duplicate acknowledge if the peer's receive window allows for it and outstanding data is less than the congestion window plus two segments. Remember that with fast retransmit, a retransmit occurs after the third duplicate acknolwedgement or after a timeout. The congestion window is not updated when LTR triggers a retransmission. Note also that if utilized with selective acknowledgements, LTR must not transmit unless the ack contains new SACK information. In the event of a congestion window of three segments and one is lost, fast retransmit would never trigger since three duplicate acks couldn't be received. This would result in a timeout, which could be a penalty of at least one second. Utilizing LTR can significantly reduce the number of timeout based retransmissions. This option is enabled by default in the profile.Investigating the LTM TCP Profile: Acknowledgements
Introduction The LTM TCP profile has over thirty settings that can be manipulated to enhance the experience between client and server. Because the TCP profile is applied to the virtual server, the flexibility exists to customize the stack (in both client & server directions) for every application delivered by the LTM. In this series, we will dive into several of the configurable options and discuss the pros and cons of their inclusion in delivering applications. Nagle's Algorithm Max Syn Retransmissions & Idle Timeout Windows & Buffers Timers QoS Slow Start Congestion Control Algorithms Acknowledgements Extended Congestion Notification & Limited Transmit Recovery The Finish Line Quick aside for those unfamiliar with TCP: the transmission control protocol (layer 4) rides on top of the internet protocol (layer 3) and is responsible for establishing connections between clients and servers so data can be exchanged reliably between them. Normal TCP communication consists of a client and a server, a 3-way handshake, reliable data exchange, and a four-way close. With the LTM as an intermediary in the client/server architecture, the session setup/teardown is duplicated, with the LTM playing the role of server to the client and client to the server. These sessions are completely independent, even though the LTM can duplicate the tcp source port over to the server-side connection in most cases, and depending on your underlying network architecture, can also duplicate the source IP. Delayed Acknowledgements The delayed acknowledgement was briefly mentioned back in the first tip in this series when we were discussing Nagle's algorithm (link above). Delayed acknowledgements are (most implementations, including the LTM) sent every other segment (note that this is not required. It can be stretched in some implementations) typically no longer than 100ms and never longer than 500ms. Disabling the delayed acknowledgement sends more packets on the wire as the ack is sent immediately upon receipt of a segment instead of being temporarily queued to piggyback on a data segment. This drives up bandwidth utilization (even if the increase per session is marginal, consider the number of connections the LTM is handling) and requires additional processing resources to handle the additional packet transfers. F5 does not recommend disabling this option. Selective Acknowledgements Traditional TCP receivers acknowledge data cumulatively. In loss conditions, the TCP sender can only learn about a lost segment each round trip time, and retransmits of successfully received segments cuts throughput significantly. With Selective Acknowlegments (SACK, defined in RFC 2018) enabled, the receiver can send an acknowledgement informing the sender of the segments it has received. This enables the sender to retransmit only the missing segments. There are two TCP options for selective acknowledgements. Because SACK is not required, it must be negotiated at session startup between peers. First is the SACK-Permitted option, which has a two byte length and is negotiated in the establishment phase of the connection. It should not be set in a non-SYN segment. Second is the TCP SACK option, which has a variable length, but cannot exceed the 40 bytes available to TCP options, so the maximum blocks of data that can be selectively acknowledged at a time is four. Note that if your profile has the RFC 1323 High Performance extensions enabled (it is by default) the maximum blocks is limited to three. A block represents received bytes of data that are contiguous and isolated (data immediately prior and immediately after is missing). Each block is defined by two 32-bit unsigned integers in network byte order: the first integer stores the left edge (first sequence number) of the block and the second integer stores the right edge (sequence number immediately following the last sequence number of the block). This option is enabled in the default profile and F5 does not recommend disabling it. For a nice visual walkthrough on selective acknowledgements, check out this article at Novell. D-SACK The D-SACK option (RFC 2883) enables SACK on duplicate acknowledgements. Remember that a duplicate acknowledgement is sent when a receiver receives a segment out of order. This option, first available in LTM version 9.4, is disabled by default and is not recommended unless the remote peers are known to also support D-SACK. ACK on Push This option signals the LTM to immediately acknowledge a segment received with the TCP PUSH flag set, which will override the delayed acknowledgement mechanism, which acts like only having delayed ACKs during bulk transfers. The result is equivalent bulk transfer efficiency as if delayed acknowledgements were on but the same transaction rates as if delayed acknowledgements were off. This option is disabled in the default profile, but is enabled in the pre-configured tcp-lan-optimized profile.Investigating the LTM TCP Profile: Slow Start
Introduction The LTM TCP profile has over thirty settings that can be manipulated to enhance the experience between client and server. Because the TCP profile is applied to the virtual server, the flexibility exists to customize the stack (in both client & server directions) for every application delivered by the LTM. In this series, we will dive into several of the configurable options and discuss the pros and cons of their inclusion in delivering applications. Nagle's Algorithm Max Syn Retransmissions & Idle Timeout Windows & Buffers Timers QoS Slow Start Congestion Control Algorithms Acknowledgements Extended Congestion Notification & Limited Transmit Recovery The Finish Line Quick aside for those unfamiliar with TCP: the transmission control protocol (layer 4) rides on top of the internet protocol (layer 3) and is responsible for establishing connections between clients and servers so data can be exchanged reliably between them. Normal TCP communication consists of a client and a server, a 3-way handshake, reliable data exchange, and a four-way close. With the LTM as an intermediary in the client/server architecture, the session setup/teardown is duplicated, with the LTM playing the role of server to the client and client to the server. These sessions are completely independent, even though the LTM can duplicate the tcp source port over to the server-side connection in most cases, and depending on your underlying network architecture, can also duplicate the source IP. TCP Slow Start Refined in RFC 3390, slow start is an optional setting that allows for the initial congestion window (cwnd) to be increased from one or two segments to between two and four segments. This refinement results in a larger upper bound for the initial window: If (MSS <= 1095 bytes) then win <= 4 * MSS; If (1095 bytes < MSS < 2190 bytes) then win <= 4380; If (2190 bytes <= MSS) then win <= 2 * MSS; The congestion window (cwnd) grows exponentially under slow start. After the handshake is completed and the connection has been established, the congestion window is doubled after each ACK received. Once the congestion window surpasses the slow start threshold (ssthresh, set by the LTM and dependent on factors like the selected congestion algorithm), the tcp connection is converted to congestion avoidance mode and the congestion window grows linearly. This relationship is represented in the following graph. Slow Start is triggered at the beginning of a connection (initial window), after an idle period in the connection (restart window), or after a retransmit timeout (loss window). Note that this setting in the profile only applies to the initial window. Some advantages of increasing the initial congestion window are eliminating the wait on timeout (up to 200ms) for receivers utilizing delayed acknowledgements and eliminating application turns for very short lived connections (such as short email messages, small web requests, etc). There are a few disadvantages as well, including higher retransmit rates in lossy networks. We'll dig a little deeper into slow start when we cover the congestion control algorithms. An excellent look at slow start in action can be found here.
