The document discusses replacing FTP with a new file transfer solution called FileCatalyst. It describes how TCP, which FTP uses, is inefficient for large file transfers over high latency links. FileCatalyst uses UDP instead of TCP to avoid TCP's flow control limits and congestion response, allowing it to fully utilize available bandwidth. The presentation demonstrates how FileCatalyst outperforms FTP for a variety of transfer scenarios and considers FileCatalyst's support for security, reliability, and automation.

1. UDP Accelerated File Transfer
- Introducing an FTP Replacement and its Benefits
Chris Bailey

2. Agenda
TCP Overview
File Transfer Issues with TCP
Acceleration with FileCatalyst
FileCatalyst vs. TCP
Demo of FileCatalyst
UDP File Transfer Considerations
The FileCatalyst Solution
Questions
| © Copyright 2 FileCatalyst, 2013

3. TCP Overview
• Provides reliability, error checking, ordered packets in a
stream
• Congestion control built in
• Internet could not survive without it
• Works well for most internet traffic, email, web browsing
small ad-hoc transfers
| © Copyright 3 FileCatalyst, 2013

4. File Transfer Issues with TCP
• Flow control limits transmission window, causes dead air with
high latency
• Very aggressive in response to network congestion, cannot
tune in application layer
• Result is less than ideal performance on wireless, satellite, or
long haul links
• Can be tuned but still not ideal for many-one, one-many
Data Packet
| © Copyright 4 FileCatalyst, 2013
TCP is a very serial process.
Each packet of data must be received before a
new packet is sent = Decreased transfer speed
Source File
Destination
File
Acknowledgments

5. Acceleration with FileCatalyst
• Ideal for bulk file transfer
• Predictable - Can send at a perfect rate
• Not affected by latency or packet loss
• Congestion Control implemented in application layer
• Tunable congestion control aggression
• Instantly detect link capacity
Source File
| © Copyright 5 FileCatalyst, 2013
Destination
File
Acknowledgments
FileCatalyst completely saturates the pipe by
sending multiple blocks of data = Increased
transfer speed

6. FileCatalyst vs. TCP Examples
Transfer Scenario FTP Actual Bandwidth Recovered
NNAA NNAA
RTT 40 ms / 60 ms
NNAA EEuurrooppee
| © Copyright 6 FileCatalyst, 2013
UDP
Throughpu
t
Throughput
444444..4433.. 33MM MMbbppbbssppss
6 Mbps
1 1M Mbpbsps 444444..4433.. 33MM MMbbppbbssppss
70700 0K bKpbsps 444444..4433.. 33MM MMbbppbbssppss
RTT 200 ms / 220 ms
NNAA AAssiiaa
RTT 300 ms / 320 ms

7. Demo of FileCatalyst

8. UDP File Transfer Considerations
• Plays fair with other traffic on network
• 10 Gbps file transfer, single stream
• High performance for many small files
• Security, reliability, automatic resume
• Automation tools, SDK, central management
| © Copyright 8 FileCatalyst, 2013

9. The FileCatalyst Solution
• Thousands of customers from all verticals
• Support for cloud deployments on Amazon, Azure, etc.
• Integration partner program, with integration support team
• Found by independent study to be only solution to maintain
10 Gbps with high latency and packet loss
• More info visit filecatalyst.com, Twitter @filecatalyst,
LinkedIn, Google+
| © Copyright 9 FileCatalyst, 2013

10. Questions?