FASP-Fast and Secure Protocol.Pdf
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
FASP-Fast And Secure Protocol A SEMINAR REPORT Submitted by ATUL M In partial fulfillment for the award of the degree Of B-TECH DEGREE In COMPUTER SCIENCE & ENGINEERING SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY KOCHI- 682022 JULY, 2010 Division of Computer Engineering School of Engineering Cochin University of Science & Technology Kochi-682022 ___________________________________________________ ______ CERTIFICATE Certified that this is a bonafide record of the seminar work titled FASP-Fast And Secure Protocol Done by Atul M of VII semester Computer Science & Engineering in the year 2010 in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of Degree of Bachelor of Technology in Computer Science & Engineering of Cochin University of Science & Technology Dr.David Peter S Dr. Sheena Mathew Head of the Division Seminar Guide ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I thank GOD almighty for guiding me throughout the seminar. I would like to thank all those who have contributed to the completion of the seminar and helped me with valuable suggestions for improvement. I am extremely grateful to Dr. David Peter, HOD, Division of Computer Science, for providing me with best facilities and atmosphere for the creative work guidance and encouragement. I would like to thank my coordinator, Mr. Sudheep Elayidom, Sr. Lecturer, Division of Computer Science, and my guide Dr. Sheena Mathew , Reader , Division of Computer Science , SOE for all help and support extended to me. I thank all the Staff members of my college and my friends for extending their cooperation during my seminar. Above all I would like to thank my parents without whose blessings, I would not have been able to accomplish my goal. TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter No. Title Page LIST OF TABLES iv LIST OF FIGURES v 1. INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………1 1.1 Transport Characteristics………………………………...1 1.2 Need for fasp…………………………………................2 2. FASP CAPABILITIES…………………………………………………...5 2.1 Core Technologies……………………………………...5 2.2 Transfer Modes………………………………………...7 2.3 Management And Automation………………………...8 3. SHORTCOMINGS OF TCP TRANSFER…………………………….10 3.1 The TCP bottleneck in file transfer…………………....10 3.2 Consequences………………………………………....11 4 THE FASP SOLUTION………………………………………………...14 4.1 Network Independent Speed………………………....14 i 4.2 Automatic Adaptive Rate Control…………………...15 4.3 Complete Security……………………………...........18 5. FASP VS FTP…………………………………………....……………..20 5.1 fasp vs. FTP wide area networks…………….……....20 5.2 fasp vs. FTP on cross-continental links…….………..21 5.3 fasp vs. FTP on intercontinental links…………….…21 5.4 fasp over high-delay satellite links…………………..22 5.5 fasp vs FTP on Wireless…………...………………...23 6 FASP TRANSFER TIMES…………………………………………...24 7 CONCLUSION………………………………………………………...25 8 REFERENCES………………………………………………………..26 ii LIST OF TABLES NO. NAME PAGE 1. Core Technologies 5 2. Transfer Modes 7 3. Management and Automation 8 4. Fasp Transfer Times 24 iii LIST OF FIGURES NO. NAME PAGE 1. TCP Throughput with distance 11 2. TCP vs FASP throughput 14 3. Efficiency of fasp 16 4. Fairness of fasp 17 5. Fasp vs FTP on WAN 20 6. Fasp vs FTP on continental networks 21 7. Fasp vs FTP on inter-continental network 22 8. Fasp vs FTP over satellite 22 9. Fasp vs FTP over wireless network 23 iv Fast and Secure Protocol 1. INTRODUCTION Aspera's fasp transfer technology is an innovative software that eliminates the fundamental bottlenecks of conventional file transfer technologies such as FTP, HTTP, and Windows CIFS, and dramatically speeds transfers over public and private IP networks. The approach achieves perfect throughput efficiency, independent of the latency of the path and robust to packet losses. In addition, users have extra-ordinary control over individual transfer rates and bandwidth sharing, and full visibility into bandwidth utilization. File transfer times can be guaranteed, regardless of the distance of the endpoints or the dynamic conditions of the network, including even transfers over satellite, wireless, and inherently long distance and unreliable international links. Complete security is built-in, including secure endpoint authentication, on-the-fly data encryption, and integrity verification. 1.1 Transport characteristics Maximum speed o Enables large data set transfers over any network at maximum speed, source disk to destination disk, regardless of network conditions or distance. Over gigabit WANs with 1 second RTT and 5% packet loss, achieves 700-800 Mbps file transfers on high-end PCs with RAID-0 and 400- 500 Mbps transfers on commodity PCs. Even with extreme packet loss and latency (30%/1 second RTT), sustains over 100 Mbps WAN transfers, and fills a satellite transponder. o Transfers large data sets of small files with the same efficiency as large single files. o Very lightweight. Does not require specialized or powerful hardware to maintain high speeds. Extraordinary bandwidth control o Provides precise rate control (pre-set and on-the-fly) for guaranteed transfer times. o Uses an automatic adaptive rate control to fully utilize available bandwidth while remaining fair to other traffic. Division Of Computer Science, SOE, CUSAT 1 Fast and Secure Protocol o Provides fast, automatic discovery of the bandwidth capacity between the source and destination. o Supports on-the-fly configurable bandwidth sharing policies. Users may pre- set and change individual transfer rates and finish times as needed. o Supports perfect progressive-style transfers, e.g. for media playout. Transfer speeds do not degrade with congestion or distance, ensuring smooth, immediate processing of the incoming data. Complete security o Includes complete, built-in security using open standard cryptography for user authentication, data encryption and data integrity verification. Software only o Uses standard, unmodified IP networking and is implemented in software as an application protocol. Requires no changes to the operating system or driver installation on the file transfer endpoints, no new appliances, and no network changes. Robust o Provides end-to-end transfer progress reporting and detailed performance statistics for monitoring and billing, as well as custom pre- and post-transfer processing. o Automatically resumes partial transfers and retries failed transfers. Flexible open architecture o Supports interoperable file and directory transfers between all major operating systems and provides a complete, modern software API to build upon. 1.2 Need for fasp In this digital world, fast and reliable movement of digital data, including massive sizes over global distances, is becoming vital business success across virtually every industry. The Transmission Control Protocol(TCP) that has traditionally been the engine of this data movement, however has inherent bottlenecks in performance(fig 1), especially for networks with high round-trip time and packet loss, and most pronounced on high-bandwidth networks. It is well understood that these inherent “soft” bottlenecks are caused by TCP’s Additive Division Of Computer Science, SOE, CUSAT 2 Fast and Secure Protocol Increase Multiplicative Decrease(AIMD) congestion avoidance algorithm, which slowly probes the available bandwidth of the network, increasing the transmission rate until packet loss is detected and then exponentially reducing the transmission rate. However, it is less understood that other sources of packet losses due to physical network media, not associated with network congestion equally reduce the transmission rate. In fact, TCP AIMD itself creates losses, and equally contributes to the bottleneck. In ramping up the transmission rate until loss occurs, AIMD inherently overdrives the available bandwidth. In some cases, this self-induced loss actually surpasses loss from other causes (E.g. Physical media) and turns a loss free communication “channel” into an unreliable “channel” with an unpredictable loss ratio. The loss-based congestion control in TCP AIMD has a deadly impact on throughput: Every packet loss leads to retransmission, and stalls the delivery of data to the receiving application until retransmission occurs. This can slow the performance of any network application but is fundamentally flawed for reliable transmission of large “bulk” data, for example file transfer, which does not require in-order (byte-stream delivery). This coupling of reliability (retransmission) to congestion control in TCP creates a severe artificial throughput penalty for file transport, as evident by the poor performance of traditional file transfer protocols built on TCP such as FTP, HTTP over wide area networks. Optimizations for these protocols such as TCP acceleration applied through hardware devices or alternative TCP improve file transfer throughput to some degree when round trip times and packet loss rates are modest, but the gains diminish significantly at global distances, Furthermore as we will later see, parallel TCP or UDP blasting technologies provide an alternative means to achieve apparently higher throughputs but at tremendous bandwidth costs. These approaches retransmit significant, sometimes colossal amounts of unneeded file data, redundant with data already in flight or received, and thus take many times longer to transfer file data than is necessary, and cause huge bandwidth cost. Specifically, their throughput of useful bits excluding retransmitted data packets—“goodput”—is very poor. These approaches deceptively appear to improve network bandwidth utilization by filling the pipe with waste, and transfer times are still