Advertisement

Adaptive Load Balancing on Multi-core IPsec Gateway

  • Wei Li
  • Shengjie Hu
  • Guanchao Sun
  • Yunchun Li
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11334)

Abstract

Cloud service providers usually offer IPsec VPN services to tenants by deploying the software IPsec gateway on the virtual machine. However, the current software IPsec gateway solutions cannot make full use of the allocated multi-core virtual machine resources and unable to meet the performance requirement of tenants. In order to optimize the IPsec gateway performance, the flow processing load must be properly allocated to multi-cores considering the multiple dimensions of load to improve the throughput of IPsec gateway. In this paper, we propose an optimizing scheme which separates the encryption and decryption computation from the packet forwarding process in the IPsec gateway, and implements fine-grained network flows scheduling in parallel processors. Furthermore, we present an adaptive load balancing algorithm based on quantifying the load of each processing core in real-time. Experimental results show that the performance of the IPsec gateway has significant improvement.

Keywords

IPsec gateway Load balancing Multi-core architecture 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work is supported in part by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (Grant No. 2016YFB1000304) and National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. U1636208).

References

  1. 1.
    Lacković, D., Tomić, M.: Performance analysis of virtualized VPN endpoints. In: 2017 40th International Convention on Information and Communication Technology, Electronics and Microelectronics (MIPRO), pp. 466–471 (2017)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shue, C., Shin, Y., Gupta, M., Choi, J.Y.: Analysis of IPSec overheads for VPN servers. In: 1st IEEE ICNP Workshop on Secure Network Protocols, 2005 (NPSec), pp. 25–30 (2005)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gandhi, R., et al.: Duet: cloud scale load balancing with hardware and software. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 44(4), 27–38 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Patel, P., et al.: Cloud scale load balancing. ACM SIGCOMM. Comput. Commun. Rev. 43(4), 207–218 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Eisenbud, D.E., et al.: Maglev: a fast and reliable software network load balancer. In: NSDI, pp. 523–535 (2016)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tan, K., Wang, P., Gan, Z., Moon, S.: Protego: cloud-scale multitenant IPsec gateway (2017)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Openstack Homepage. https://www.openstack.org/. Accessed 29 May 2018
  8. 8.
    Li, W., Lin, F., Sun, G.: SDIG: Toward software-defined IPsec gateway. In: 2016 IEEE 24th International Conference on Network Protocols (ICNP), pp. 1–8 (2016)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vajaranta, M., Kannisto, J., Harju, J.: IPsec and IKE as functions in SDN controlled network. In: Yan, Z., Molva, R., Mazurczyk, W., Kantola, R. (eds.) NSS 2017. LNCS, vol. 10394, pp. 521–530. Springer, Cham (2017).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-64701-2_39CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nelms, T., Ahamad, M.: Packet scheduling for deep packet inspection on multi-core architectures. In: ACM/IEEE Symposium on Architectures for Networking and Communications Systems (ANCS) 2010, pp. 1–11 (2010)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hanford, N., et al.: Characterizing the impact of end-system affinities on the end-to-end performance of high-speed flows. In: Proceedings of the Third International Workshop on Network-Aware Data Management, p. 1 (2013)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dobrescu, M., et al.: RouteBricks: exploiting parallelism to scale software routers. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGOPS 22nd Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, pp. 15–28 (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Gallenmüller, S., Emmerich, P., Wohlfart, F., Raumer, D., Carle, G.: Comparison of frameworks for high-performance packet IO. In: Proceedings of the Eleventh ACM/IEEE Symposium on Architectures for Networking and Communications Systems, pp. 29–38 (2015)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Linux Foundation Project. DPDK. http://dpdk.org/. Accessed 29 May 2018
  15. 15.
    Rizzo, L.: Netmap: a novel framework for fast packet I/O. In: 21st USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 12), pp. 101–112 (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
    Jiang, H., Xie, G., Salamatian, K.: Load balancing by ruleset partition for parallel IDS on multi-core processors. In: International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks, ICCCN (2013)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Park, J., Jung, W., Jo, G., Lee, I., Lee, J.: PIPSEA: a practical IPsec gateway on embedded APUs. In: Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security, pp. 1255–1267 (2016)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Meng, J., Chen, X., Chen, Z., Lin, C., Mu, B., Ruan, L.: Towards high-performance IPsec on Cavium OCTEON platform. In: Chen, L., Yung, M. (eds.) INTRUST 2010. LNCS, vol. 6802, pp. 37–46. Springer, Heidelberg (2011).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-25283-9_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Emmerich, P., Gallenmüller, S., Raumer, D., Wohlfart, F., Carle, G.: Moongen: a scriptable high-speed packet generator. In: Proceedings of the 2015 Internet Measurement Conference, pp. 275–287 (2015)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    StrongSwan. https://www.strongswan.org/. Accessed 29 May 2018
  22. 22.
    Krawczyk, H.: New hash functions for message authentication. In: Guillou, Louis C., Quisquater, J.-J. (eds.) EUROCRYPT 1995. LNCS, vol. 921, pp. 301–310. Springer, Heidelberg (1995).  https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-49264-X_24CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Beijing Key Lab of Network Technology, School of Computer Science and EngineeringBeihang UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations