Cited by 576Network Traffic and Congestion ControlSoftware-Defined Networks and 5GTraffic control and management

The BLUE active queue management algorithms

Wu-chang Feng, Shin, K.G., Kandlur, D.D., Saha, D.·2002·IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking

Abstract

In order to stem the increasing packet loss rates caused by an exponential increase in network traffic, the IETF has been considering the deployment of active queue management techniques such as RED (random early detection) (see Floyd, S. and Jacobson, V., IEEE/ACM Trans. Networking, vol.1, p.397-413, 1993). While active queue management can potentially reduce packet loss rates in the Internet, we show that current techniques are ineffective in preventing high loss rates. The inherent problem with these algorithms is that they use queue lengths as the indicator of the severity of congestion. In light of this observation, a fundamentally different active queue management algorithm, called BLUE, is proposed, implemented and evaluated. BLUE uses packet loss and link idle events to manage congestion. Using both simulation and controlled experiments, BLUE is shown to perform significantly better than RED, both in terms of packet loss rates and buffer size requirements in the network. As an extension to BLUE, a novel technique based on Bloom filters (see Bloom, B., Commun. ACM, vol.13, no.7, p.422-6, 1970) is described for enforcing fairness among a large number of flows. In particular, we propose and evaluate stochastic fair BLUE (SFB), a queue management algorithm which can identify and rate-limit nonresponsive flows using a very small amount of state information.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tnet.2002.801399

Cites

36 of 36 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Feng, W.-C., Shin, K. G., Kandlur, D. D., & Saha, D.
Affiliations
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • University of Michigan (US)
  • IBM Research - Thomas J. Watson Research Center (US)
Venue
IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking
Published
2002-08
Volume
10
Issue
4
Pages
513-528
ISSN
1063-6692 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2155981613
Cited by
576
References
36
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 6 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 16 · 2019: 23 · 2018: 18 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 21 · 2015: 27 · 2014: 40 · 2013: 23 · 2012: 37
FWCI
34.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Network Traffic and Congestion Control
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Software-Defined Networks and 5G
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Traffic control and management
Keywords
active queue management, random early detection, packet loss, network congestion, queue length, packet loss rate, buffer size, Bloom filter, flow fairness

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review