Advertisement

Advances in Oblivious Routing of Internet Traffic

  • M. Kodialam
  • T. V. Lakshman
  • Sudipta Sengupta

Routing is a central topic in networking since it determines the connectivity between users. Recently, with the growing use of the Internet for a wide variety of bandwidth intensive applications, including peer-to-peer and on-demand/real-time multimedia, it has also become important that routing accounts for the quality-of-service needs of applications and users. A research problem of much current interest is traffic-oblivious routing for ensuring that the network provides the needed quality-of-service despite uncertain knowledge of the carried traffic. Oblivious routing involves using pre-determined paths to route between each ingress-egress node in the network (typically an Internet domain) that do not change with changing traffic patterns. By removing the need to detect changes in traffic in real-time or reconfigure the network in response to it, significant simplification in network management/operations and associated reduction in costs can be achieved. Moreover, oblivious routing has the potential to make the Internet much more robust and predictable in the face of rapidly varying and unpredictable traffic patterns. Theoretical advances in the area have shown that oblivious routing can provide these benefits without compromising capacity efficiency. We survey recent advances in oblivious routing with a view towards its application in (intra-domain) Internet routing.

Keywords

Intermediate Node Internet Protocol Link Failure Link Capacity Backup Path 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    D. Applegate, L. Breslau, and E. Cohen, “Coping with Network Failures: Routing Strategies for Optimal Demand Oblivious Restoration”, ACM SIGMETRICS 2004, June 2004.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    D. Applegate and E. Cohen, “Making Intra-Domain Routing Robust to Changing and Uncertain Traffic Demands: Understanding Fundamental Tradeoffs”, ACM SIGCOMM 2003, August 2003.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Aspnes, Y. Azar, A. Fiat, S. A. Plotkin, and O. Waarts, “On-line routing of virtual circuits with applications to load balancing and machine scheduling”, Journal of the ACM, 44(3):486504, 1997.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Y. Azar, E. Cohen, A. Fiat, H. Kaplan, and H. Räcke, “Optimal Oblivious Routing in Polynomial Time”, Journal of Computer and System Sciences, 69(3):383–394, 2004.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    F. Baker, “Requirements for IP Version 4 Routers”, RFC 1812, June 1995.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    J. C. R. Bennett, C. Partridge, and N. Shectman, “Packet Reordering is Not Pathological Network Behavior”, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 7, no. 6, pp. 789-798, December 1999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    E. Blanton and M. Allman, “On Making TCP More Robust to Packet Reordering”, ACM Computer Communication Review, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 20–30, January 2002.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. Case, M. Fedor, M. Schoffstall, J. Davin, “Simple Network Management Protocol (SNMP)”, RFC 1157, May 1990.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Douglas E. Comer, Internetworking with TCP/IP Vol.1: Principles, Protocols, and Architecture, Prentice Hall, 4th edition, January 2000.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    N. G. Duffield, P. Goyal, A. G. Greenberg, P. P. Mishra, K. K. Ramakrishnan, J. E. van der Merwe, “A flexible model for resource management in virtual private network”, ACM SIGCOMM 1999, August 1999.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    T. Erlebach and M. Rüegg, “Optimal Bandwidth Reservation in Hose-Model VPNs with Multi-Path Routing”, IEEE Infocom 2004, March 2004.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    J. A. Fingerhut, S. Suri, and J. S. Turner, “Designing Least-Cost Nonblocking Broadband Networks”, Journal of Algorithms, 24(2), pp. 287–309, 1997.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    M. Grötschel, L. Lovász, and A. Schrijver, Geometric Algorithms and Combinatorial Optimization, Springer-Verlag, 1988.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    W. D. Grover, Mesh-based Survivable Transport Networks: Options and Strategies for Optical, MPLS, SONET and ATM Networking, Prentice Hall, 2003.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    A. Gupta, A. Kumar, M. Pal, and T. Roughgarden, “Approximation via cost sharing: Simpler and better approximation algorithms for network design”, Journal of the ACM (JACM), vol. 54, issue 3, June 2007.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    C. Harrelson, K. Hildrum, S. Rao, “A Polynomial-time Tree Decomposition to Minimize Congestion”, Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures (SPAA), June 2003.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    S. Iyer, S. Bhattacharyya, N. Taft, C. Diot, “An approach to alleviate link overload as observed on an IP backbone”, IEEE Infocom 2003, March 2003.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    S. Jaiswal, G. Iannaccone, C. Diot, J. Kurose, and D. Towsley, “Measurement and Classification of Out-of-Sequence Packets in a Tier-1 IP Backbone”, IEEE Infocom 2003, March 2003.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    G. Italiano, R. Rastogi, and B. Yener, “Restoration Algorithms for VPN Hose Model”, IEEE Infocom 2002, 2002.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    M. Kodialam, T. V. Lakshman, and Sudipta Sengupta, “Efficient and Robust Routing of Highly Variable Traffic”, Third Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (HotNets-III), November 2004.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    M. Kodialam, T. V. Lakshman, J. B. Orlin, and Sudipta Sengupta, “A Versatile Scheme for Routing Highly Variable Traffic in Service Overlays and IP Backbones”, IEEE Infocom 2006, April 2006.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    M. Kodialam, T. V. Lakshman, J. B. Orlin, and Sudipta Sengupta, “Preconfiguring IP-over-Optical Networks to Handle Router Failures and Unpredictable Traffic”, IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications (JSAC), Special Issue on Traffic Engineering for MultiLayer Networks, June 2007.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    M. Kodialam, T. V. Lakshman, and S. Sengupta, “Maximum Throughput Routing of Traffic in the Hose Model”, IEEE Infocom 2006, April 2006.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    M. Kodialam, T. V. Lakshman, and Sudipta Sengupta, “Throughput Guaranteed Restorable Routing Without Traffic Prediction”, IEEE ICNP 2006, November 2006.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    A. Kumar, R. Rastogi, A. Silberschatz , B. Yener, “Algorithms for provisioning VPNs in the hose model”, ACM SIGCOMM 2001, August 2001.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    C. Labovitz, A. Ahuja, and F. Jahanian, “Experimental Study of Internet Stability and Backbone Failures”, Proceedings of 29th International Symposium on Fault-Tolerant Computing (FTCS), Madison, Wisconsin, pp. 278–285, June 1999.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    H. Liu and R. Zhang-Shen, “On Direct Routing in the Valiant Load-Balancing Architecture”, IEEE Globecom 2005, November 2005.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    A. Medina, N. Taft, K. Salamatian, S. Bhattacharyya, C. Diot, “Traffic Matrix Estimation: Existing Techniques and New Directions”, ACM SIGCOMM 2002, August 2002.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    H. Räcke, “Minimizing congestion in general networks”, 43rd IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS), 2002.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    R. Ramaswami and K. N. Sivarajan, Optical Networks: A Practical Perspective, Morgan-Kaufmann Publishers, 2002.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    E. Rosen, A. Viswanathan, and R. Callon, “Multiprotocol Label Switching Architecture”, RFC 3031, January 2001.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    F. Shahrokhi and D. Matula, “The Maximum Concurrent Flow Problem”, Journal of ACM, 37(2):318–334, 1990.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Sudipta Sengupta, Efficient and Robust Routing of Highly Variable Traffic, Ph.D. Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), December 2005.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    N. Spring, R. Mahajan, D. Wetherall, and T. Anderson, “Measuring ISP Topologies with Rocketfuel”, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 2–16, February 2004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    I. Stoica, D. Adkins, S. Zhuang, S. Shenker, S. Surana, “Internet Indirection Infrastructure”, ACM SIGCOMM 2002, August 2002.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    L. G. Valiant, “A scheme for fast parallel communication”, SIAM Journal on Computing, 11(7), pp. 350–361, 1982.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Y. Zhang, M. Roughan, N. Duffield, A. Greenberg, “Fast Accurate Computation of Large-Scale IP Traffic Matrices from Link Loads”, ACM SIGMETRICS 2003, June 2003.Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    R. Zhang-Shen and N. McKeown “Designing a Predictable Internet Backbone Network”, Third Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (HotNets-III), November 2004.Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    R. Zhang-Shen and N. McKeown, “Designing a Predictable Internet Backbone with Valiant Load-Balancing”, Thirteenth International Workshop on Quality of Service (IWQoS 2005), June 2005.Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Y. Zhang, M. Roughan, C. Lund, and D. Donoho, “An Information-Theoretic Approach to Traffic Matrix Estimation”, ACM SIGCOMM 2003, August 2003.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. Kodialam
    • 1
  • T. V. Lakshman
    • 1
  • Sudipta Sengupta
    • 2
  1. 1.Bell LaboratoriesAlcatel-LucentMurray HillUSA
  2. 2.Microsoft ResearchRedmondUSA

Personalised recommendations