An Analytical Model for the LISP Cache Size

  • Florin Coras
  • Albert Cabellos-Aparicio
  • Jordi Domingo-Pascual
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7289)


Concerns regarding the scalability of the inter-domain routing have encouraged researchers to start elaborating a more robust Internet architecture. While consensus on the exact form of the solution is yet to be found, the need for a semantic decoupling of a node’s location and identity is generally accepted as the only way forward. One of the most successful proposals to follow this guideline is LISP (Loc/ID Separation Protocol). Design wise, its aim is to insulate the Internet’s core routing state from the dynamics of edge networks. However, this requires the introduction of a mapping system, a distributed database, that should provide the binding of the two resulting namespaces. In order to avoid frequent lookups and not to penalize the speed of packet forwarding, map-caches that store temporal bindings are provisioned in routers. In this paper, we rely on the working-set theory to build a model that accurately predicts a map-cache’s performance for traffic with time translation invariance of the working-set size. We validate our model empirically using four different packet traces collected in two different campus networks.


LISP Internet architecture cache modeling working set 


  1. 1.
    LISP Testbed,
  2. 2.
    Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., Lewis, D.: LISP Alternative Topology (LISP+ALT). draft-ietf-lisp-alt-10 (December 2011)(work in progress)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Denning, P.J.: The working set model for program behavior. Commun. ACM 11(5), 323–333 (1968)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Denning, P.J., Schwartz, S.C.: Properties of the working-set model. Commun. ACM 15(3), 191–198 (1972)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Farinacci, D., Fuller, V., Meyer, D., Lewis, D.: Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP). draft-ietf-lisp-17 (December 2011) (work in progress)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Feldmeier, D.: Improving gateway performance with a routing-table cache. In: INFOCOM 1988. Networks: Evolution or Revolution, Proceedings. Seventh Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communcations Societies, pp. 298–307. IEEE (1988)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hinden, R.: New Scheme for Internet Routing and Addressing (ENCAPS) for IPNG. RFC 1955 (Informational) (June 1996)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Huston, G.: BGP Report,
  9. 9.
    Iannone, L., Bonaventure, O.: On the Cost of Caching Locator/ID Mappings. In: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on emerging Networking EXperiments and Technologies (CoNEXT 2007), pp. 1–12. ACM (December 2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jain, R.: Characteristics of destination address locality in computer networks: A comparison of caching schemes. Computer Networks and ISDN Systems 18(4), 243–254 (1990)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jakab, L., Cabellos-Aparicio, A., Coras, F., Saucez, D., Bonaventure, O.: LISP-TREE: A DNS Hierarchy to Support the LISP Mapping System. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications 28(8), 1332–1343 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kim, C., Caesar, M., Gerber, A., Rexford, J.: Revisiting Route Caching: The World Should Be Flat. In: Moon, S.B., Teixeira, R., Uhlig, S. (eds.) PAM 2009. LNCS, vol. 5448, pp. 3–12. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kim, J., Iannone, L., Feldmann, A.: A Deep Dive into the LISP Cache and What ISPs Should Know about It. In: Domingo-Pascual, J., Manzoni, P., Palazzo, S., Pont, A., Scoglio, C. (eds.) NETWORKING 2011, Part I. LNCS, vol. 6640, pp. 367–378. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Li, T.: Recommendation for a Routing Architecture. RFC 6115 (Informational) (February 2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Menth, M., Hartmann, M., Hofling, M.: FIRMS: a future Internet mapping system. IEEE Journal on Selected Areas in Communications 28(8), 1326–1331 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Meyer, D., Zhang, L., Fall, K.: Report from the IAB Workshop on Routing and Addressing. RFC 4984 (Informational) (September 2007)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    O’Dell, M.: GSE - An Alternate Addressing Architecture for IPv6. draft-ietf-ipngwg-gseaddr-00.txt (1997)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    University of Oregon: RouteViews Project,
  19. 19.
    Fuller, V., Farinacci, D., Lewis, D.: LISP Delegated Database Tree (LISP-DDT) draft-ietf-lisp-ddt-00 (November 2011) (work in progress)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    WITS: Waikato Internet Traffic Storage,
  21. 21.
    Zhang, H., Chen, M., Zhu, Y.: Evaluating the performance on ID/Loc mapping. In: Global Telecommunications Conference (GLOBECOM 2008), pp. 1–5 (2008)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Florin Coras
    • 1
  • Albert Cabellos-Aparicio
    • 1
  • Jordi Domingo-Pascual
    • 1
  1. 1.Universitat Politècnica de CatalunyaBarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations