Analisis Kinerja Algoritme TCP Congestion Control Berdasarkan Single dan Multiple Flow pada Multi-Path Routing

<p class="Abstrak">Teknik <em>multi-path routing</em> merupakan solusi efektif untuk menambah kapasitas <em>bandwidth</em> jaringan. Namun, TCP menggunakan <em>multiple paths</em> sama dengan di <em>single path</em>. Penelitian ini melakukan analisis kinerja algoritme TCP <em>congestion control</em> Reno, BIC, CUBIC, dan BBR pada <em>multi-path routing</em> dengan setiap <em>multiple</em> <em>paths</em> menggunakan <em>cost</em> yang sama. Analisis yang dilakukan meliputi perbandingan antara <em>single path routing</em> dengan <em>multi-path routing</em>, <em>single flow</em>, dan <em>multiple flow</em>. Analisis <em>single flow</em> meliputi <em>link delay</em> dan <em>loss rate</em>. Sedangkan analisis <em>multiple flow</em> meliputi <em>inter </em>TCP<em> protocol fairness</em> dan <em>fairness</em> antara TCP dengan UDP. Semua evaluasi dilakukan berdasarkan emulasi pada VirtualBox. Berdasarkan hasil emulasi, <em>multi-path routing</em> dapat berdampak pada <em>packet reordering</em>, tetapi tidak mengakibatkan penurunan rata-rata <em>throughput</em> yang signifikan. Pada <em>single</em> <em>flow</em>, BBR merupakan algoritme TCP <em>congestion control</em> terbaik pada <em>multi-path routing</em>. Namun, pada <em>multiple flow</em>, CUBIC merupakan algoritme TCP <em>congestion control</em> terbaik pada <em>multi-path routing</em>. Pada evaluasi <em>link delay</em>, rata-rata RTT BBR lebih rendah hingga 58 ms dibandingkan dengan Reno, BIC, dan CUBIC. Sedangkan pada evaluasi <em>loss rate</em>, rata-rata <em>throughput</em> BBR lebih tinggi hingga 12 Mbps dibandingkan dengan Reno, BIC, dan CUBIC. Pada evaluasi <em>inter</em> TCP <em>protocol fairness</em> dan <em>fairness</em> antara TCP dengan UDP, <em>fairness</em> CUBIC paling mendekati 1 dibandingkan dengan Reno, BIC, dan BBR. </p><p class="Abstrak"> </p><p class="Abstrak"><em><strong>Abstract</strong></em></p><p class="Abstract"><em>The multi-path routing technique is an effective solution to increase network bandwidth capacity. However, TCP uses multiple paths similar to a single path. This study analyzes the performance of TCP congestion control algorithms Reno, BIC, CUBIC, and BBR on multi-path routing with each multiple paths using the same cost. The analysis includes a comparison between single path routing and multi-path routing, single flow, and multiple flows. In a single flow, the analysis includes link delay and loss rate. Whereas in multiple flows, the analysis includes inter TCP protocol fairness and fairness between TCP and UDP. All evaluations are based on emulation in VirtualBox. Based on the results from emulation, multi-path routing can have an impact on packet reordering but does not result in a significant degrade in average throughput. In a single flow, BBR is the best TCP congestion control algorithm on multi-path routing. However, in multiple flows, CUBIC is the best TCP congestion control algorithm on multi-path routing. In the link delay evaluations, the average RTT on BBR up to 58 ms lower than Reno, BIC, and CUBIC. Whereas in the loss rate evaluations, the average throughput on BBR up to 12 Mbps higher than Reno, BIC, and CUBIC. In the evaluation of inter TCP protocol fairness and fairness between TCP and UDP, fairness on CUBIC is closest to 1 than Reno, BIC, and BBR. </em></p><p class="Abstrak"><em><strong><br /></strong></em></p>