UDP broadcast/multicast vs unicast behaviour (dropped packets)

djbuijs picture djbuijs · Jun 24, 2013 · Viewed 17k times · Source

I have an embedded device (source) which is sending out a stream of (audio) data in chunks of 20 ms (= about 330 bytes) by means of a UDP packets. The network volume is thus fairly low at about 16kBps (practically somewhat more due to UDP/IP overhead). The device is running the lwIP stack (v1.3.2) and connects to a WiFi network using a WiFi solution from H&D Wireless (HDG104, WiFi G-mode). The destination (sink) is a Windows Vista PC which is also connected to the WiFi network using a USB WiFi dongle (WiFi G-mode). A program is running on the PC which allows me to monitor the amount of dropped packets. I am also running Wireshark to analyze the network traffic directly. No other clients are actively sending data over the network at this point.

When I send the data using broadcast or multicast many packets are dropped, sometimes upto 15%. However, when I switch to using UDP unicast, the amount of packets dropped is negligible (< 2%).

Using UDP I expect packets to be dropped (which is OK in my Audio application), but why do I see such a big difference in performance between Broadcast/Multicast and unicast?

My router is a WRT54GS (FW v7.50.2) and the PC (sink) is using a trendnet TEW-648UB network adapter, running in WiFi G-mode.

Answer

djbuijs picture djbuijs · Jul 9, 2013

This looks like it is a well known WiFi issue:

Quoted from http://www.wi-fiplanet.com/tutorials/article.php/3433451

The 802.11 (Wi-Fi) standards specify support for multicasting as part of asynchronous services. An 802.11 client station, such as a wireless laptop or PDA (not an access point), begins a multicast delivery by sending multicast packets in 802.11 unicast data frames directed to only the access point. The access point responds with an 802.11 acknowledgement frame sent to the source station if no errors are found in the data frame.

If the client sending the frame doesnt receive an acknowledgement, then the client will retransmit the frame. With multicasting, the leg of the data path from the wireless client to the access point includes transmission error recovery. The 802.11 protocols ensure reliability between stations in both infrastructure and ad hoc configurations when using unicast data frame transmissions.

After receiving the unicast data frame from the client, the access point transmits the data (that the originating client wants to multicast) as a multicast frame, which contains a group address as the destination for the intended recipients. Each of the destination stations can receive the frame; however, they do not respond with acknowledgements. As a result, multicasting doesnt ensure a complete, reliable flow of data.

The lack of acknowledgments with multicasting means that some of the data your application is sending may not make it to all of the destinations, and theres no indication of a successful reception. This may be okay, though, for some applications, especially ones where its okay to have gaps in data. For instance, the continual streaming of telemetry from a control valve monitor can likely miss status updates from time-to-time.

This article has more information: http://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/docs/00/08/44/57/PDF/RR-5947.pdf

One very interesting side-effect of the multicast implementation (at the WiFi MAC layer) is that as long as your receivers are wired, you will not experience any issues (due to the acknowledgement on the receiver side, which is really a unicast connection). However, with WiFi receivers (as in my case), packet loss is enormous and completely unacceptable for audio.