The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Dynamics of random early detection
Open accessAbstract
In this paper we evaluate the effectiveness of Random Early Detection (RED) over traffic types categorized as non-adaptive, fragile and robust, according to their responses to congestion. We point out that RED allows unfair bandwidth sharing when a mixture of the three traffic types shares a link. This unfairness is caused by the fact that at any given time RED imposes the same loss rate on all flows, regardless of their bandwidths.We propose Fair Random Early Drop (FRED), a modified version of RED. FRED uses per-active-flow accounting to impose on each flow a loss rate that depends on the flow's buffer use.We show that FRED provides better protection than RED for adaptive (fragile and robust) flows. In addition, FRED is able to isolate non-adaptive greedy traffic more effectively. Finally, we present a "two-packet-buffer" gateway mechanism to support a large number of flows without incurring additional queueing delays inside the network. These improvements are demonstrated by simulations of TCP and UDP traffic.FRED does not make any assumptions about queueing architecture; it will work with a FIFO gateway. FRED's per-active-flow accounting uses memory in proportion to the total number of buffers used: a FRED gateway maintains state only for flows for which it has packets buffered, not for all flows that traverse the gateway.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Promoting the use of end-to-end congestion control in the Internet
Floyd, S., & Fall, K. (1999) · IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking · doi:10.1109/90.793002 · Cited by 1,646
The NewReno Modification to TCP's Fast Recovery Algorithm
Henderson, T., Floyd, S., Gurtov, A., & Nishida, Y. (2012) · doi:10.17487/rfc6582 · Cited by 1,410
Ott, T. J., Lakshman, T. V., & Wong, L. H. (1999) · IEEE INFOCOM '99. Conference on Computer Communications. Proceedings. Eighteenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies. The Future is Now (Cat. No.99CH36320) · doi:10.1109/infcom.1999.752153 · Cited by 678
The BLUE active queue management algorithms
Feng, W.-C., Shin, K. G., Kandlur, D. D., & Saha, D. (2002) · IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking · doi:10.1109/tnet.2002.801399 · Cited by 576
Analytic evaluation of RED performance
Bonald, T., May, M., & Bolot, J.-C. (2002) · Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2000. Conference on Computer Communications. Nineteenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (Cat. No.00CH37064) · doi:10.1109/infcom.2000.832539 · Cited by 405
Metadata
- Authors
- Lin, D., & Morris, R.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM '97 conference on Applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communication
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 1997-10
- Pages
- 127-137
- OpenAlex
- W2023140037
- Cited by
- 793
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 25.48
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Dynamics of random early detection. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/263105.263154
- The paper
- Lin, D., & Morris, R. (1997). Dynamics of random early detection. Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM '97 conference on Applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communication. https://doi.org/10.1145/263105.263154
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.