Advertisement

Compact Routing for Flat Networks

  • Kazuo Iwama
  • Masaki Okita
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2848)

Abstract

Cowen presented a universal compact routing algorithm with a stretch factor of three and a table-size of O(n 2/3 log 4/3 n), based on a simple and practical model [1]. (The table-size is later improved to \(O(\sqrt{n log^{3}}n)\) [2].) This stretch factor of three matches a general lower bound given in [3] and also matches a much tighter lower bound if we restrict the model to the Cowen’s [4]. Thus it seems quite hard to improve the stretch factor. However, her analysis is of course for the worst case; the situation might differ if we assume some desirable property that average-case networks often possess. As such a property, we consider the notion of flatness in this paper and it is shown that the stretch factor can be significantly improved if the given network is almost flat. Our new algorithm achieves a stretch factor of s < 3 and a table size of \(O(\sqrt{n log n})\).

Keywords

Short Path Table Entry Stretch Factor Nearby Node Chordal Ring 
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.
    Cowen, L.J.: Compact routing with minimum stretch. In: Proceedings of the 10th Annual ACM Symposium on Discrete Algorithms (SODA), ACM/SIAM, pp. 255–260 (1999)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Thorup, M., Zwick, U.: Compact routing schemes. In: Proceedings of the 13th Annual ACM Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures (SPAA), pp. 1–10 (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gavoille, C., Gengler, M.: Space-efficiency of routing schemes of stretch factor three. In: Krizanc, D., Widmayer, P. (eds.) Proceedings of the 4th International Colloquium on Structual Information & Communication Complexity (SIROCCO), pp. 162–175. Carleton Scientific (1997)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Iwama, K., Kawachi, A.: Compact routing with stretch factor of less than three. In: Proceedings of the 19th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC), p. 337. ACM PRESS, New York (2000); A longer version in 21th IASTED PDCS, pp. 223–228 (2000)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Karger, D.R., Ruhl, M.: Finding nearest neighbors in growth-restricted metrics. In: Proceedings of the 34th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pp. 741–750 (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Plaxton, C.G., Rajaraman, R., Richa, A.W.: Accessing nearby copies of replicated objects in a distributed environment. In: Proceedings of the 9th Annual ACM Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures (SPAA), pp. 311–320 (1997)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kleinrock, L., Kamoun, F.: Hierarchical routing for large networks; performance evaluation and optimization. Computer Networks 1, 155–174 (1977)MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Santoro, N., Khatib, R.: Labelling and implicit routing in networks. The Computer Journal 28, 5–8 (1985)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    van Leeuwen, J., Tan, R.B.: Routing with compact routing tables. The Book of L, pp. 259–273 (1986)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    van Leeuwen, J., Tan, R.B.: Interval routing. The Computer Journal 30, 259–273 (1987)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Frederickson, G.N., Janardan, R.: Space-efficient message routing in c-decompo-sable networks. SIAM Journal on Computing 19, 164–181 (1990)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Frederickson, G.N., Janardan, R.: Designing networks with compact routing tables. Algorithmica, 171–190 (1988)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Peleg, D., Upfal, E.: A tradeoff between space and efficiency for routing tables. In: Proceedings of the 20th Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pp. 43–52. Carleton Scientific (1988)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gavoille, C., Pérennès, S.: Memory requirement for routing in distributed networks. In: Proceedings of the 15th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC). LNCS, vol. 1644, pp. 125–133. ACM PRESS, New York (1996)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Awerbuch, B., Bar-Noy, A., Linial, N., Peleg, D.: Compact distributed data structures for adaptive routing. In: Proccedings of the 21st Annual ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing (STOC), pp. 479–489 (1989)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Eilam, T., Gavoille, C., Peleg, D.: Compact routing schemes with low stretch factor. In: Proceedings of the 17th Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing (PODC), pp. 11–20 (1998)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Narayanan, L., Opatrny, J.: Compact routing on chordal rings of degree four. In: Proceedings of the 4th International Colloquium on Structual Information & Communication Complexity (SIROCCO), pp. 125–137. Carleton Scientific (1997)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gavoille, C., Hanusse, N.: Compact routing tables for graphs of bounded genus. In: Wiedermann, J., Van Emde Boas, P., Nielsen, M. (eds.) ICALP 1999. LNCS, vol. 1644, pp. 351–360. Springer, Heidelberg (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Buhrman, H., Hoepman, J.H., Vitányi, P.: Space-efficient routing tables for almost all netowrks and the incompressibility method. SIAM Journal on Computing 28, 1414–1432 (1999)zbMATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fraigniaud, P., Gavoille, C.: A space lower bound for routing in trees. In: Alt, H., Ferreira, A. (eds.) STACS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2285, p. 65. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kazuo Iwama
    • 1
  • Masaki Okita
    • 1
  1. 1.School of InformaticsKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations