Observed performance of elastic Internet applications

Computer Communications

Volumn 26, Issue 8, 2003, Pages 914-925

  Charzinski, Joachim ^a  

^a SIEMENS AG   (Germany)

Author keywords

Application level performance; Heavy tail; HTTP; Internet; Latency; Packet trace; Parallel connections; POP3; SMTP; Traffic measurement

Indexed keywords

BANDWIDTH; ELECTRONIC MAIL; HTTP; PARALLEL PROCESSING SYSTEMS; WEB BROWSERS;

TRANSMISSION CONTROL PROTOCOL (TCP);

WORLD WIDE WEB;

EID: 0037457638     PISSN: 01403664     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-3664(02)00223-2     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Menascé D., Almeida V. Capacity Planning for Web Services. 2002;Prentice-Hall PTR, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
2. J. Postel, Simple Mail Transfer Protocol, RFC 821, 1982.
3. Charzinski J. Web performance in practice - why we are waiting. AEÜ Int. J. Elec. Commum. 55:2001;37-45.
4. Charzinski J. Problems of elastic traffic admission control in an HTTP scenario. Proc. IWQoS, Karlsruhe, Germany. 2001.
5. Charzinski J. Measured HTTP performance and fun factors. Proc. ITC, Salvador, BA, Brasil. 2001;1063-1074.
6. Smith F., Hernandez Campos F., Jeffay K., Ott D. What TCP/IP protocol headers can tell us about the Web. Proc. ACM Sigmetrics/Performance, Cambridge, MA, USA. 2001;245-256.
7. Feldmann A. BLT: bi-layer tracing of HTTP and TCP/IP. Proc. WWW-9, Amsterdam, Netherlands. 2000.
8. Krishnamurthy B., Wills C. Analyzing factors that influence end-to-end Web performance. Comp. Netw. 33:2000;17-32.
9. Huitema C., Weerahandi S. Internet Measurements: the rising tide and the DNS snag. Proc. ITC Spec. Sem. IP Traffic, Monterey, CA, USA. 2000;2.1-2.10.
10. Barford P., Crovella M. A performance evaluation of hyper text transfer protocols. Proc. ACM Sigmetrics, Atlanta, GA, USA. 1999;188-197.
11. Barford P., Crovella M. Measuring Web performance in the wide area. ACM Perf. Eval. Rev. 27:(2):1999;37-48.
12. Habib A., Abrams M. Analysis of sources of latency in downloading Web pages. Proc. Webnet, San Antonio, TX, USA. 2000.
13. Cohen E., Kaplan H. Prefetching the means for document transfer: a new approach for reducing Web latency. Proc. IEEE Infocom, Tel Aviv, Israel. 2000.
14. Charzinski J. HTTP/TCP connection and flow characteristics. Perf. Eval. 42:2000;149-162.
15. WAND Research Group Trace at NLANR Trace Archive, Auckland-IV Trace, http://pma.nlanr.net/traces/long/auck4.html.
16. R. Fielding et al., Hypertext Transfer Protocol - HTTP/1.1, RFC 2616, 1999.
17. Krishnamurthy B., Rexford J. Web Protocols and Practice: HTTP/1.1, Networking Protocols, Caching, and Traffic Measurement. 2001;Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA.
18. B. Mah, An Empirical Model of HTTP Network Traffic, in: Proc. IEEE Infocom, Kobe, Japan, 1997.
19. Choi H.-K., Limb J. A behavioral model of Web traffic. Proc. ICNP, Toronto, Canada. 1999.
20. Crovella M., Bestavros A. Self-similarity in world wide Web traffic: evidence and possible causes. IEEE/ACM Trans. Networking. 5:1997;835-846.
21. R. Braden, Requirements for Internet hosts - application and support, RFC 1123, 1989.
22. Heyman D., Lakshman T., Neidhardt A. A new method for analysing feedback-based protocols with applications to engineering Web traffic over the Internet. ACM Perf. Eval. Rev. 25:1997;24-38.
23. Kleinrock L. Queueing Systems. vol. 1:1975;Wiley, New York, NY.
24. J. Myers, M. Rose, Post Office Protocol - version 3, RFC 1939, 1996.