流媒体传输SCTP协议的性能比较与分析研究

随着实时流媒体基础的进一步发展,普遍使用的TCP和UDP协议都不能很好的满足更高性能流媒体信息的传输。本文对SCTP、TCP和UDP协议的性能进行了比较分析,证明了SCTP作为一个通用的、面向连接的、可靠的传输层协议,能够更好的满足流媒体数据差别传输要求,特别是其选择性有序和多宿性使得流媒体传输性能有明显改善。     

SCTP流媒体传输性能分析研究

随着实时流媒体基础的进一步发展,普遍使用的TCP和UDP协议都不能很好的满足更高性能流媒体信息的传输。文章对SCTP、TCP和UDP协议的性能进行了比较分析,证明了SCTP作为一个通用的、面向连接的、可靠的传输层协议,能够更好的满足流媒体数据差别传输要求,特别是其选择性有序和多宿性使得流媒体传输性能有明显改善。     

基于SCTP协议的新型流媒体传输方案

随着流媒体技术的发展,传统的传输控制协议TCP严格有序、确认重传的方式,以及基于用户数据报UDP的流媒体传输方案中RTP与RTCP速率调整都不能很好地满足流媒体的传输要求.针对流媒体数据的特点及其对网络的特殊要求,结合流控制传输协议SCTP多宿主、多流、可配置的无序递交等特性,论证基于SCTP协议的新型流媒体传输方案能够更好地满足流媒体传输,并在ns-allinone-2.28环境下进行仿真验证.结果显示基于SCTP协议的新型流媒体传输方案具有更低的丢报率,更能提升流媒体传输性能.     

TCP与SCTP-CMT分析及在无线网络应用比较

TCP协议与SCTP协议同属于传输层协议,都可以提供可靠的数据传输服务。SCTP-CMT是在SCTP协议的基础上提出的并行多路径传输机制,可以同时利用多条路径进行数据传输以提高链路的利用率,该文对TCP和SCTP-CMT的基本特性进行了简述。为比较TCP与SCTP-CMT在具有多种接入方式的无线网络中的传输性能,该文以车载网络环境为例,并在NS2仿真工具下对TCP与SCTP-CMT在车载网络环境中的传输效率进行仿真比较,仿真结果显示,SCTPCMT的传输性能始终高于TCP。     

SCTP并行多路径传输在车载网络中的应用研究

讨论了SCTP的基本属性,与TCP和UDP相比SCTP并行多路径传输机制更适合应用于车载网络环境.为提高SCTP并行多路径传输机制在车载网络环境中的传输性能,对SCTP并行多路径传输机制运用于车载网络环境中存在的不足之处进行了分析,针对由无线信号错误导致的拥塞问题和接收端缓存问题提出了适应性的改进算法,包括改进的拥塞控制算法和超时重传算法.在NS2仿真平台下进行了仿真实验,仿真结果表明,改进后的SCTP-CMT协议在吞吐量上较改进前有明显提升.     

关于流传输协议SCTP的研究

流控制传输协议（Stream Control Transmission Protocol,SCTP）是一种可靠的传输协议,它在两个端点之间提供稳定、有序的数据传递服务,并且可以保护数据消息边界。与TCP和UDP不同,SCTP通过多地址主机（Mulci-homing）和多流（Multi-streaming）能提供这些收益,这两种功能均可提高可用性。     

关于流传输协议SCTP的研究

流控制传输协议(Stream Control Transmission Protocol,SCTP)是一种可靠的传输协议,它在两个端点之间提供稳定、有序的数据传递服务,并且可以保护数据消息边界。与TCP和UDP不同,SCTP通过多地址主机(Multi-homing)和多流(Multi-streaming)功能提供这些收益,这两种功能均可提高可用性。     

SCTP性能的仿真分析

SCTP是下一代网络(NGN)的一种重要传输协议,融合TCP与UDP协议的优点,提供端到端的可靠业务传输,用来在IP网络上可信地传输SS7信令.立足SCTP一些新特性(比如多流性、多宿性),通过仿真软件NS2,在网络时延、抖动、丢包率、吞吐量几个典型的QoS参数方面,对比分析了SCTP协议与不同版本的TCP协议;仿真结果表明,使用SCTP协议的网络综合性能优于传统的TCP协议,从而进一步提高了网络的QoS,同时用户QoE也得到了提升.将SCTP性能与不同的TCP协议进行对比,基于这些网络QoS参数进行对比分析,为以后的SCTP特性进一步研究工作起到了铺垫的作用.     

SCTP协议分析与仿真研究

流控制传输协议（SCTP）是IETF推荐的一种新的传输层协议,它继承了传统TCP的一些特性,并发展出独特的多流性和多宿性,能更好地适应现代通信网发展的需求,并在一定程度上有取代传统传输层协议的趋势。文中在介绍传统传输层协议的基础上,详细分析了SCTP的特点和功能模块,并基于NS2软件模拟网络故障,对多址主机环境下的SCTP和TCP传输的容错能力进行了仿真比较。结果表明：SCTP能够在主路径断开的情况下自动切换路径继续传输,其多宿特征确保了SCTP协议的鲁棒性。     

TCP和SCTP路由协议的对比研究

为了更好地了解流控制协议—SCTP的相关性能,利用NS-2网络仿真软件,从单路径和多路径两个方面对TCP和SCTP协议进行了比较。实验结果表明,在应对链路恶化的情况下,SCTP协议的吞吐量更大,也具有更高的稳定性,更能满足现在网络高性能传输的要求。     

SCTP: a proposed standard for robust Internet data transport

The stream control transmission protocol (SCTP) is an evolving general purpose Internet transport protocol designed to bridge the gap between TCP and UDP. SCTP evolved from a telephony signaling protocol for IP networks and is now a proposed standard with the Internet Engineering Task Force. Like TCP, SCTP provides a reliable, full-duplex connection and mechanisms to control network congestion. However, SCTP expands transport layer possibilities beyond TCP and UDP, offering new delivery options that are particularly desirable for telephony signaling and multimedia applications.     

一种基于SCTP的嵌入式Linux系统高性能数据传输的方法

SCTP属于传输层协议,提供了多宿主、多流等特性,解决了TCP带来的头端阻塞问题和UDP的安全可靠性问题。本文主要介绍了SCTP传输层协议在嵌入式Linux下的实现并设计了一种基于SCTP协议的嵌入式Linux系统之间的高性能数据传输的方法,特别在网络环境不理想的状况下,能获得更好的传输性能。     

SCTP: What, Why, and How

Similar to TCP and UDP, the stream control transmission protocol (SCTP) is a transport protocol providing end-to-end communication. SCTP was originally designed within the IETF Signaling Transport (SIGTRAN) working group to address TCP's shortcomings relating to telephony signaling over IP networks. SCTP has since evolved into a general-purpose IETF transport protocol with kernel implementations on various platforms. Similar to TCP, SCTP provides a connection-oriented, reliable, full- duplex, congestion and flow-controlled layer 4 channel. Unlike both TCP and UDP, however, SCTP offers new delivery options that better match diverse applications' needs. Here, we introduce SCTP, discuss its innovative services, and outline ongoing SCTP-related research and standardization activities.     

UDP协议与TCP协议的对比分析与可靠性改进

鉴于互联网快速发展,计算机网络正逐渐应用到通信网络,以太网在移动通信网络建设中起到越来越重要的作用。目前,实现可靠数据传递的方法主要采用传输控制TCP协议或者SCTP简单流传输协议。传输层的TCP协议和UDP协议各有特点和优势,在与以太网的结合过程中,通过详细的对比分析,UDP更加符合以太网的传输环境,不过由于UDP是非可靠通信协议,直接将其使用在对可靠性要求非常严格的电信领域还需要对其进行改造。结合TCP和UDP的优点,提出了RUDP协议,并做了简单介绍。     

SCTP: new transport protocol for TCP/IP

For the past 20 years (1980-2000), applications and end users of the TCP/IP suite have employed one of two protocols: the transmission control protocol or the user datagram protocol. Yet some applications already require greater functionality than what either TCP or UDP has to offer, and future applications might require even more. To extend transport layer functionality, the Internet Engineering Task Force approved the stream control transmission protocol (SCTP) as a proposed standard in October 2000. SUP was spawned from an effort started in the IETF Signaling Transport (Sigtrans) working group to develop a specialized transport protocol for call control signaling in voice-over-IP (VoIP) networks. Recognizing that other applications could use some of the new protocol's capabilities, the IETF now embraces SCTP as a general-purpose transport layer protocol, joining TCP and UDP above the IP layer. Like TCP, STCP offers a point-to-point, connection-oriented, reliable delivery transport service for applications communicating over an IP network     

SCTP传输MPEG4视频流的性能分析

为了在IP分组网络上传输N0.7信令，IETF信令传输工作组专门制定了流量控制传输协议(SCTP)。该文对SCTP与TCP进行了比较，分析了CCTP适合于信令和多媒体传输的特性，研究了用SCTP传输MPEG4视频流的性能，并进行了仿真和分析。最后讨论了SCTP其它的一些可能的应用。     

基于SCTP协议的并行多路径传输研究

SCTP协议是IEFT信令组提出的一种面向多媒体通信的流控制传输协议,是继TCP、UDP协议之后的一种新兴的传输层协议。它的诸多新特性具有很广泛的研究价值,其中的多宿主特性开辟了并行多路径传输的新空间。分析了SCTP协议的多宿主特性以及并行多路径传输（CMT）关键技术和目前存在的问题。     

Hiding information in a Stream Control Transmission Protocol

The STCP (Stream Control Transmission Protocol) is a candidate for a new transport layer protocol that may replace the TCP (Transmission Control Protocol) and the UDP (User Datagram Protocol) protocols in future IP networks. Currently, the SCTP is implemented in, or can be added to, many popular operating systems (Windows, BSD, Linux, HP-UX or Sun Solaris). This paper identifies and presents the most likely “places” where hidden information can be exchanged using an SCTP. The paper focuses mostly on proposing new steganographic methods that can be applied to an SCTP and that can utilise new, characteristic SCTP features, such as multi-homing and multi-streaming. Moreover, for each method, the countermeasure is covered. When used with malicious intent, a method may pose a threat to network security. Knowledge about potential SCTP steganographic methods may be used as a supplement to RFC5062, which describes security attacks in an SCTP protocol. Presented in this paper is a complete analysis of information hiding in an SCTP, and this analysis can be treated as a “guide” when developing steganalysis (detection) tools.     

cookie思想在TCP与SCTP中的应用

典型的Dos攻击一SYN flood一对于使用传统TCP协议的网络服务来说是一个很头疼的问题，应对这个问题的一个有效方案是Bernstein提出的SYN cookies方法，而SCTP也使用了类似的机制。本文将探讨TCP与SCTP中是怎样利用cookie的思想来防范Dos攻击的，并用实验比较TCP与SCTP在抵御Dos攻击时的实际性能。     

Evaluating TCP-friendliness in light of Concurrent Multipath Transfer

In prior work, a CMT protocol using SCTP multihoming (termed SCTP-based CMT) was proposed and investigated for improving application throughput. SCTP-based CMT was studied in (bottleneck-independent) wired networking scenarios with ns-2 simulations. This paper studies the TCP-friendliness of CMT in the Internet. In this paper, we surveyed historical developments of the TCP-friendliness concept and argued that the original TCP-friendliness doctrine should be extended to incorporate multihoming and SCTP-based CMT.Since CMT is based on (single-homed) SCTP, we first investigated TCP-friendliness of single-homed SCTP. We discovered that although SCTP’s congestion control mechanisms were intended to be “similar” to TCP’s, being a newer protocol, SCTP specification has some of the proposed TCP enhancements already incorporated which results in SCTP performing better than TCP. Therefore, SCTP obtains larger share of the bandwidth when competing with a TCP flavor that does not have similar enhancements. We concluded that SCTP is TCP-friendly, but achieves higher throughput than TCP, due to SCTP’s better loss recovery mechanisms just as TCP-SACK and TCP-Reno perform better than TCP-Tahoe.We then investigated the TCP-friendliness of CMT. Via QualNet simulations, we found out that one two-homed CMT association has similar or worse performance (for smaller number of competing TCP flows) than the aggregated performance of two independent, single-homed SCTP associations while sharing the link with other TCP connections, for the reason that a CMT flow creates a burstier data traffic than independent SCTP flows. When compared to the aggregated performance of two-independent TCP connections, one two-homed CMT obtains a higher share of the tight link bandwidth because of better loss recovery mechanisms in CMT. In addition, sharing of ACK information makes CMT more resilient to losses. Although CMT obtains higher throughput than two independent TCP flows, CMT’s AIMD-based congestion control mechanism allows other TCP flows to co-exist in the network. Therefore, we concluded that CMT is TCP-friendly, similar to two TCP-Reno flows are TCP-friendly when compared to two TCP-Tahoe flows.