A Performance Evaluation of TCP BBRv2 Alpha
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The alpha version of Bottleneck Bandwidth and Round-trip Time version 2 (BBRv2) has been recently presented, which aims to mitigate the shortcomings of its predecessor, BBR version 1 (BBRv1). Previous studies show that BBRv1 provides a high link utilization and low queuing delay by estimating the available bottleneck bandwidth. However, its aggressiveness induces unfairness when flows i) use different congestion control algorithms, such as CUBIC, and ii) have distinct round-trip times (RTTs). This paper presents an experimental evaluation of BBRv2, using Mininet. Results show that the coexistence between BBRv2-CUBIC is enhanced with respect to that of BBRv1-CUBIC, as measured by the fairness index. They also show that BBRv2 mitigates the RTT unfairness problem observed in BBRv1. Additionally, BBRv2 achieves a better fair share of the bandwidth than its predecessor when network conditions such as bandwidth and latency dynamically change. Results also indicate that the average flow completion time of concurrent flows is reduced when BBRv2 is used.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it