\relax 
\citation{csa}
\citation{skv}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{kt}
\citation{kg}
\citation{csa}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{hot}
\citation{sk}
\citation{to}
\citation{jt}
\citation{vrc}
\citation{bgh}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{ps}
\citation{hot}
\citation{jm}
\citation{skv}
\citation{csa}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{cbm}
\citation{tmsl}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {I}Introduction}{1}}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{stevens}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{csa}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {II}Steady-state Model Incorporating the Slow-start Phase}{2}}
\newlabel{sec:model}{{II}{2}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {II-A}Assumptions}{2}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {1}{\ignorespaces The extended steady state model - evolution of congestion window size when loss indications are triple-duplicate ACK's and time-outs.}}{2}}
\newlabel{equmodel}{{1}{2}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {II-B}Model Development}{2}}
\newlabel{eq:mi}{{1}{2}}
\newlabel{eq:si}{{2}{2}}
\citation{jacob}
\citation{stevens}
\citation{csa}
\citation{csa}
\citation{csa}
\newlabel{eq:bth}{{3}{3}}
\newlabel{sec:sl}{{II-B.1}{3}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsubsection}{\numberline {II-B.1}The Slow-Start Phase}{3}}
\newlabel{eq:discrete_cwnd}{{4}{3}}
\newlabel{eq:sim_discrete_cwnd}{{5}{3}}
\newlabel{eq:t_discrete_cwnd}{{7}{3}}
\newlabel{eq:c_cwnd}{{8}{3}}
\newlabel{eq:a_datan}{{11}{3}}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\newlabel{eq:nequation}{{12}{4}}
\newlabel{eq:c_d_r}{{13}{4}}
\newlabel{eq:twss}{{14}{4}}
\newlabel{eq:fwssy}{{16}{4}}
\newlabel{eq:fwss}{{18}{4}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {2}{\ignorespaces Packets sent during a TDP. Adopted from \cite  {pftk}.}}{4}}
\newlabel{fig:dong}{{2}{4}}
\newlabel{eq:fyss}{{19}{4}}
\newlabel{eq:fzss}{{20}{4}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsubsection}{\numberline {II-B.2}The Congestion-Avoidance Phase}{4}}
\newlabel{eq:yi}{{21}{4}}
\newlabel{eq:ai}{{22}{4}}
\newlabel{eq:wi}{{23}{4}}
\newlabel{eq:fin}{{24}{4}}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\newlabel{eq:al}{{25}{5}}
\newlabel{eq:eyi}{{26}{5}}
\newlabel{eq:ewi}{{27}{5}}
\newlabel{eq:efin}{{28}{5}}
\newlabel{eq:final}{{29}{5}}
\newlabel{eq:awk}{{30}{5}}
\newlabel{eq:smfb}{{31}{5}}
\newlabel{eq:eow}{{32}{5}}
\newlabel{eq:fea}{{34}{5}}
\newlabel{eq:inequality}{{35}{5}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsubsection}{\numberline {II-B.3}The Time-out Phases}{5}}
\newlabel{eq:pfqtd}{{37}{5}}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\newlabel{eq:lastw}{{38}{6}}
\newlabel{eq:rvw}{{39}{6}}
\newlabel{eq:cwe}{{40}{6}}
\newlabel{eq:fqtd}{{41}{6}}
\newlabel{eq:fn}{{42}{6}}
\newlabel{eq:fr}{{43}{6}}
\newlabel{eq:fzto}{{44}{6}}
\newlabel{eq:fp}{{45}{6}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsubsection}{\numberline {II-B.4}The Steady State Send Rate and Throughput}{6}}
\newlabel{eq:fsr}{{46}{6}}
\newlabel{eq:fssr}{{47}{6}}
\newlabel{eq:trou}{{49}{6}}
\newlabel{eq:troud}{{50}{6}}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{csa}
\citation{csa}
\citation{csa}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {3}{\ignorespaces Our proposed model is compared with the one developed in \cite  {pftk} in terms of the predicted throughput difference versus the loss rate ($p$) for the case of: $RTT = 200ms$, $MSS = 536bytes$, $w_1 =1segment$, $T_0=1sec$, $W_m = 20segments$, $b =2$. }}{7}}
\newlabel{fig:diff}{{3}{7}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {III}Stochastic Model for Short-lived Flows}{7}}
\newlabel{sec:st}{{III}{7}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {III-A}The Connection Start-up Phase}{7}}
\newlabel{eq:three}{{51}{7}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {III-B}The Initial Slow-start Phase}{7}}
\newlabel{eq:finit}{{52}{7}}
\newlabel{eq:d1}{{54}{7}}
\citation{skv}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {4}{\ignorespaces An illustration of a triple-duplicate (TD) event.}}{8}}
\newlabel{fig:qss}{{4}{8}}
\newlabel{eq:senequation}{{57}{8}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {III-C}The First Loss}{8}}
\newlabel{eq:qsswssslf}{{59}{8}}
\newlabel{eq:mqss}{{60}{8}}
\newlabel{eq:msqss}{{61}{8}}
\citation{ns}
\citation{csa}
\newlabel{eq:nt}{{63}{9}}
\newlabel{eq:winit}{{65}{9}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {III-D}Sending the Rest of the Packets}{9}}
\newlabel{eq:trest}{{66}{9}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {III-E}Total Latency}{9}}
\newlabel{eq:latency_z}{{67}{9}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {5}{\ignorespaces The model for short-lived TCP connections is compared with the steady-state model in terms of throughput versus loss rate for different file sizes. Model parameter values: $RTT = 200ms$, $MSS = 536bytes$, $w_1 =1segment$, $T_0=1sec$, $W_m = 20segments$, $b =2$.}}{9}}
\newlabel{fig:l_all}{{5}{9}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {6}{\ignorespaces The \textit  {ns}-2 model that was used to validate our analytical TCP models.}}{9}}
\newlabel{fig:sim_t}{{6}{9}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {IV}Model Validation through Simulation}{9}}
\newlabel{sec:sim}{{IV}{9}}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{pftk}
\citation{csa}
\citation{skv}
\citation{csa}
\citation{skv}
\citation{csa}
\citation{skv}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {IV-A}The Steady-state Model}{10}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {7}{\ignorespaces Predicted throughput obtained by our proposed steady-state model and the one developed in \cite  {pftk} are compared against simulation results for the case of $0.005 < p < 0.1$ $RTT = 200ms$, $MSS = 536bytes$, $w_1 =1segment$, $T_0=1sec$, $W_m = 20segments$.}}{10}}
\newlabel{fig:stst_s}{{7}{10}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {IV-B}Short-lived Flows Model: Latency versus Transferred File Size}{10}}
\citation{csa}
\citation{skv}
\citation{csa}
\citation{skv}
\citation{csa}
\citation{csa}
\citation{csa}
\citation{csa}
\citation{csa}
\citation{csa}
\citation{csa}
\citation{csa}
\citation{csa}
\citation{csa}
\citation{csa}
\citation{skv}
\citation{pftk}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {8}{\ignorespaces Our proposed steady-state model is compared with the one developed in \cite  {pftk} in terms of the \textit  {average error} for the case of $0.005 < p < 0.1$ $RTT = 200ms$, $MSS = 536bytes$, $w_1 =1segment$, $T_0=1sec$, $W_m = 20segments$.}}{11}}
\newlabel{fig:avr_e}{{8}{11}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {subsection}{\numberline {IV-C}Short-lived Flows Model: Throughput versus Loss Rate and File Size}{11}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {9}{\ignorespaces Predicted latency versus transferred file size obtained by our short-lived TCP connection model and the ones developed in \cite  {csa} and \cite  {skv} are compared against simulation results for the case of $p=0$, $RTT = 100ms$, $MSS = 536bytes$, $w_1 =1segment$, $T_0=1sec$, $W_m = 20segments$.}}{11}}
\newlabel{fig:slowstart_p0}{{9}{11}}
\@writefile{lot}{\contentsline {table}{\numberline {I}{\ignorespaces Our short-lived TCP connection model is compared against the one proposed in \cite  {csa} in terms of the average error.}}{11}}
\newlabel{tb:flt_e}{{I}{11}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {10}{\ignorespaces Predicted throughput versus loss rate obtained by our short-lived TCP connection model and the one developed in \cite  {csa} are compared against simulation results for the case of a 2KB-file-size and $RTT = 100ms$, $MSS = 536bytes$, $w_1 =1segment$, $T_0=1sec$,$W_m = 20segments$.}}{11}}
\newlabel{fig:fin_2k}{{10}{11}}
\citation{*}
\bibstyle{IEEE}
\bibdata{IEEEabrv,short_dong}
\bibcite{csa}{1}
\bibcite{skv}{2}
\bibcite{pftk}{3}
\bibcite{kt}{4}
\bibcite{kg}{5}
\bibcite{hot}{6}
\bibcite{sk}{7}
\bibcite{to}{8}
\bibcite{jt}{9}
\bibcite{vrc}{10}
\bibcite{bgh}{11}
\bibcite{ps}{12}
\bibcite{jm}{13}
\bibcite{cbm}{14}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {11}{\ignorespaces Predicted throughput versus loss rate obtained by our short-lived TCP connection model and the one developed in \cite  {csa} are compared against simulation results for the case of a 6KB-file-size and $RTT = 100ms$, $MSS = 536bytes$, $w_1 =1segment$, $T_0=1sec$,$W_m = 20segments$.}}{12}}
\newlabel{fig:fin_6k}{{11}{12}}
\@writefile{lof}{\contentsline {figure}{\numberline {12}{\ignorespaces Predicted throughput versus loss rate obtained by our short-lived TCP connection model and the one developed in \cite  {csa} are compared against simulation results for the case of a 11KB-file-size and $RTT = 100ms$, $MSS = 536bytes$, $w_1 =1segment$, $T_0=1sec$,$W_m = 20segments$.}}{12}}
\newlabel{fig:fin_11k}{{12}{12}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{\numberline {V}Conclusion}{12}}
\newlabel{sec:con}{{V}{12}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{References}{12}}
\bibcite{tmsl}{15}
\bibcite{stevens}{16}
\bibcite{jacob}{17}
\bibcite{ns}{18}
\bibcite{harv}{19}
\bibcite{lakshman}{20}
\bibcite{kumar}{21}
\bibcite{mf}{22}
\bibcite{msmo}{23}
\bibcite{okm}{24}
\bibcite{casetti}{25}
\bibcite{bssk}{26}
\bibcite{hoe}{27}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{Appendix I: The expectation of 1/w}{13}}
\newlabel{ap:ew}{{I}{13}}
\newlabel{eq:taylor}{{68}{13}}
\newlabel{eq:fnw}{{69}{13}}
\newlabel{eq:ovx}{{70}{13}}
\@writefile{toc}{\contentsline {section}{Appendix II: The variance of $W^{TD}$}{13}}
\newlabel{ap: va}{{II}{13}}
\newlabel{eq:val}{{72}{13}}
\newlabel{eq:left}{{73}{13}}
\newlabel{eq:xw}{{74}{13}}
\newlabel{eq:vbeta}{{75}{14}}
\newlabel{eq:right}{{76}{14}}
\newlabel{eq:vfinal}{{77}{14}}