![]() |
Figure 10 shows the cumulative distribution of
the overhead for an FEC+ARQ based CLVL across the overlay links
over which we performed our measurements. For each link, we ran an
TCP pipe for
and measured the overhead required to achieve
a target loss rate of
. We notice that the overhead of
FEC+ARQ is very close to the average loss-rate along the overlay
links. The difference between the two is the amount of FEC used in the
second round to protect the retransmitted packets. In comparison, a
pure FEC based CLVL construction far higher bandwidth. This is
primarily due to the network loss characteristics: the burstier the
background traffic (i.e., the longer the tail of the loss-rate
distribution), the higher the amount of FEC required to recover from
these losses [22].