EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Tom Edsall
dblp:139/4063
· DBLP profile ↗
8ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2023
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Computer networks · 7Systems, architecture and hardware · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Computer networks
7 papers |
Datacenter networks · 48% Transport protocols and congestion control · 20% Software-defined and programmable networks · 17% | |
| Computer architecture, parallel and distributed computing, and storage systems
2 papers |
Reconfigurable computing and FPGAs · 54% Hardware accelerators and domain-specific architectures · 46% |
Topics — the 14 heaviest of 17, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Transport protocols and congestion control › active queue management
PI controller |
1.1 | 2 | 2023 | Congestion Control for Datacenter Networks: A Control-Theoretic Approach · IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst. 2023 RoCC: robust congestion control for RDMA · CoNEXT 2020 |
Datacenter networks › RDMA
RDMA congestion control |
1.1 | 2 | 2023 | Congestion Control for Datacenter Networks: A Control-Theoretic Approach · IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst. 2023 RoCC: robust congestion control for RDMA · CoNEXT 2020 |
Datacenter networks › load balancing
flowlet switching |
0.5 | 2 | 2017 | Let It Flow: Resilient Asymmetric Load Balancing with Flowlet Switching · NSDI 2017 CONGA: distributed congestion-aware load balancing for datacenters · SIGCOMM 2014 |
Datacenter networks
load balancing |
0.5 | 2 | 2017 | Let It Flow: Resilient Asymmetric Load Balancing with Flowlet Switching · NSDI 2017 CONGA: distributed congestion-aware load balancing for datacenters · SIGCOMM 2014 |
Software-defined and programmable networks
programmable data plane |
0.4 | 2 | 2023 | Programmable Packet Scheduling at Line Rate · SIGCOMM 2016 Congestion Control for Datacenter Networks: A Control-Theoretic Approach · IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst. 2023 |
Internet architecture and protocols
packet scheduling |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Programmable Packet Scheduling at Line Rate · SIGCOMM 2016 |
Internet architecture and protocols › packet scheduling
programmable packet scheduling |
0.2 | 1 | 2016 | Programmable Packet Scheduling at Line Rate · SIGCOMM 2016 |
Software-defined and programmable networks › programmable data plane
p4 implementation |
0.2 | 1 | 2023 | Congestion Control for Datacenter Networks: A Control-Theoretic Approach · IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst. 2023 |
Datacenter networks › load balancing
congestion-aware load balancing |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | CONGA: distributed congestion-aware load balancing for datacenters · SIGCOMM 2014 |
Datacenter networks
datacenter transport |
0.2 | 1 | 2014 | CONGA: distributed congestion-aware load balancing for datacenters · SIGCOMM 2014 |
Cellular and mobile networks › ultra-low latency services › tactile internet
ultra-low-latency communication |
0.1 | 1 | 2012 | Less Is More: Trading a Little Bandwidth for Ultra-Low Latency in the Data Center · NSDI 2012 |
Datacenter networks › lossless ethernet
priority flow control |
0.1 | 1 | 2020 | RoCC: robust congestion control for RDMA · CoNEXT 2020 |
Routing and switching
traffic engineering |
0.1 | 1 | 2017 | Let It Flow: Resilient Asymmetric Load Balancing with Flowlet Switching · NSDI 2017 |
Reconfigurable computing and FPGAs
reconfigurable computing |
0.1 | 1 | 2017 | dRMT: Disaggregated Programmable Switching · SIGCOMM 2017 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
PI control · 1.1control theory · 0.7p4 · 0.4flowlet switching · 0.3flowlet · 0.2distributed congestion feedback · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2023 | Congestion Control for Datacenter Networks: A Control-Theoretic ApproachabstractIn this paper, we presentRoCC, a robust congestion control approach for datacenter networks based on RDMA.RoCCleverages switch queue size as an input to a PI controller, which computes the fair data rate of flows in the queue. The PI parameters are self-tuning to guarantee stability, rapid convergence, and fair and near-optimal throughput in a wide range of congestion scenarios. Our simulation and DPDK implementation results show thatRoCCcan achieve up to$7\times$reduction in PFC frames generated under high load levels, compared to DCQCN. At the same time,RoCCcan achieve$1.7 - 4.5\times$and$1.4 - 3.9\times$lower tail latency for long flows and$2.1-7\times$and$3.5-8.2\times$lower tail latency for short flows, compared to DCQCN and HPCC, respectively. We also find thatRoCCdoes not require PFC. The functional components ofRoCCcan be efficiently implemented in P4 and FPGA-based switch hardware. Danushka Menikkumbura, Parvin Taheri, Erico Vanini, Sonia Fahmy, Patrick Eugster, Tom Edsall |
IEEE Trans. Parallel Distributed Syst. | 6 |
| 2020 | RoCC: robust congestion control for RDMAabstractIn this paper, we present RoCC, a robust congestion control approach for datacenter networks based on RDMA. RoCC leverages switch queue size as an input to a PI controller, which computes the fair data rate of flows in the queue, signaling it to the flow sources. The PI parameters are self-tuning to guarantee stability, rapid convergence, and fair and near-optimal throughput in a wide range of congestion scenarios. Our simulation and DPDK implementation results show that RoCC can achieve up to 7× reduction in PFC frames generated under high average load levels, compared to DCQCN. At the same time, RoCC can achieve up to 8× lower tail latency, compared to DCQCN and HPCC. We also find that RoCC does not require PFC. The functional components of RoCC are implementable in P4-based and fixed-function switch ASICs. Parvin Taheri, Danushka Menikkumbura, Erico Vanini, Sonia Fahmy, Patrick Eugster, Tom Edsall |
CoNEXT | 6 |
| 2017 | Let It Flow: Resilient Asymmetric Load Balancing with Flowlet Switching
Erico Vanini, Mohammad Alizadeh, Parvin Taheri, Tom Edsall |
NSDI | 5 |
| 2017 | dRMT: Disaggregated Programmable SwitchingabstractWe present dRMT (disaggregated Reconfigurable Match-Action Table), a new architecture for programmable switches. dRMT overcomes two important restrictions of RMT, the predominant pipeline-based architecture for programmable switches: (1) table memory is local to an RMT pipeline stage, implying that memory not used by one stage cannot be reclaimed by another, and (2) RMT is hardwired to always sequentially execute matches followed by actions as packets traverse pipeline stages. We show that these restrictions make it difficult to execute programs efficiently on RMT. Sharad Chole, Andy Fingerhut, Sha Ma, Anirudh Sivaraman, Shay Vargaftik, Alon Berger, Gal Mendelson, Mohammad Alizadeh, Shang-Tse Chuang, Isaac Keslassy, Ariel Orda, Tom Edsall |
SIGCOMM | 12 |
| 2016 | Programmable Packet Scheduling at Line RateabstractSwitches today provide a small menu of scheduling algorithms. While we can tweak scheduling parameters, we cannot modify algorithmic logic, or add a completely new algorithm, after the switch has been designed. This paper presents a design for a {\em programmable} packet scheduler, which allows scheduling algorithms---potentially algorithms that are unknown today---to be programmed into a switch without requiring hardware redesign. Anirudh Sivaraman, Suvinay Subramanian, Mohammad Alizadeh, Sharad Chole, Shang-Tse Chuang, Anurag Agrawal, Hari Balakrishnan, Tom Edsall, Sachin Katti, Nick McKeown |
SIGCOMM | 8 |
| 2015 | Towards Programmable Packet SchedulingabstractPacket scheduling in switches is not programmable; operators only choose among a handful of scheduling algorithms implemented by the manufacturer. In contrast, other switch functions such as packet parsing and header processing are becoming programmable [10, 3, 6]. This paper presents a programmable packet scheduler that allows operators to program a variety of scheduling algorithms. Anirudh Sivaraman, Suvinay Subramanian, Anurag Agrawal, Sharad Chole, Shang-Tse Chuang, Tom Edsall, Mohammad Alizadeh, Sachin Katti, Nick McKeown, Hari Balakrishnan |
HotNets | 6 |
| 2014 | CONGA: distributed congestion-aware load balancing for datacentersabstractWe present the design, implementation, and evaluation of CONGA, a network-based distributed congestion-aware load balancing mechanism for datacenters. CONGA exploits recent trends including the use of regular Clos topologies and overlays for network virtualization. It splits TCP flows into flowlets, estimates real-time congestion on fabric paths, and allocates flowlets to paths based on feedback from remote switches. This enables CONGA to efficiently balance load and seamlessly handle asymmetry, without requiring any TCP modifications. CONGA has been implemented in custom ASICs as part of a new datacenter fabric. In testbed experiments, CONGA has 5x better flow completion times than ECMP even with a single link failure and achieves 2-8x better throughput than MPTCP in Incast scenarios. Further, the Price of Anarchy for CONGA is provably small in Leaf-Spine topologies; hence CONGA is nearly as effective as a centralized scheduler while being able to react to congestion in microseconds. Our main thesis is that datacenter fabric load balancing is best done in the network, and requires global schemes such as CONGA to handle asymmetry. Mohammad Alizadeh, Tom Edsall, Sarang Dharmapurikar, Ramanan Vaidyanathan, Kevin Chu, Andy Fingerhut, Vinh The Lam, Francis Matus, Navindra Yadav, George Varghese |
SIGCOMM | 2 |
| 2012 | Less Is More: Trading a Little Bandwidth for Ultra-Low Latency in the Data Center
Mohammad Alizadeh, Abdul Kabbani, Tom Edsall, Balaji Prabhakar, Amin Vahdat, Masato Yasuda |
NSDI | 3 |