A Proposal for Inter-domain QoS Routing Based on Distributed Overlay Entities and QBGP

Yannuzzi, M.; Fonte, Alexandre; Masip-Bruin, X.; Monteiro, Edmundo; López, Sergio Sánchez; Curado, Marília; Domingo‐Pascual, Jordi

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-30193-6_26

Cited by 10 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…On the one hand, the route control decisions in Algorithm 1 are inherently stochastic for a number of reasons, for example, due to its adaptive features along time, the fact that different controllers might have configured different thresholds R th , and others. On the other hand, we explicitly use a hysteresis switching timer T H that we introduced in a previous work [13] and that guarantees a random hysteresis period after each traffic relocation. More precisely, traffic toward a given destination d cannot be relocated until the random and decreasing timer T H = 0.…”

Section: Randomizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving the Performance of Route Control Middleboxes in a Competitive Environment

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

56 0890-8044/08/$25.00 © 2008 IEEE oday, the vast majority of the communications on the Internet are between nodes located in non-transit (i.e., stub) networks. Stub networks are primarily composed of medium and large enterprise customers, universities, public administrations, content service providers (CSPs), and small Internet service providers (ISPs). These networks exploit a widespread practice called multihoming, which consists of using multiple external links to connect to different transit providers. By increasing their connectivity to the Internet, stub networks potentially can obtain several benefits, especially in terms of resilience, cost, and traffic performance [1]. These are described as potential benefits because multihoming per se cannot improve any resilience, cost, and traffic performance. Accordingly, multihomed stub networks require additional mechanisms to achieve these improvements. In particular, when an automatic mechanism actively optimizes the cost and end-to-end performance of the traffic routed among different links connecting a multihomed stub network to the Internet, it is referred to as intelligent route control (IRC).During the last few years, IRC has attracted significant interest in both the research and the commercial fields. Several vendors are developing and offering IRC solutions [2][3][4] that increasingly are being adopted by multihomed stub networks. Most available IRC solutions follow the same principle, that is, they dynamically shift part of the egress traffic of a multihomed subscriber from one of its ISPs to another, using measurement-driven path switching techniques. IRC systems operate in relatively short timescales -even reaching switching frequencies on the order of a few seconds -allowing IRC users to balance cost and performance criteria according to the priority and requirements of their applications.Despite these strengths, IRC practices have one major weakness, that is, they try to achieve a set of local objectives individually without considering the effects of their decisions on the performance of the network. Recently, it was discovered that in a competitive environment, IRC systems actually can cause significant performance degradation rather than improvement. In [5], the authors show that persistent oscillations can occur when independent controllers become synchronized due to a considerable overlap in their measurement time windows. To avoid synchronization issues, the authors propose randomized IRC strategies and empirically show that the oscillations disappear after introducing a random component in the route control decision.It is important to note that although randomization offers a straightforward mechanism to mitigate the oscillations, it cannot guarantee global stability. This issue raises concerns given the proliferation of IRC products because as the number of interfering IRC systems increases, randomization becomes AbstractMultihomed subscribers are increasingly adopting intelligent route control solutions to optimize the cost and end-to-en...

show abstract

Section: Randomizationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Improving the Performance of Route Control Middleboxes in a Competitive Environment

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Proposals such as [62][63][64][65][66] reflect this kind of approach. The main idea behind the overlay concept is to decouple part of the policy control portion of the routing process from BGP devices.…”

Section: Overlay Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, it is possible to conceive a completely distributed overlay architecture and routing layer specifically designed to provide inter-domain QoS Routing among strategically selected non-peering multihomed ASs. The foremost motivation for influencing traffic in this way is that with only a very small number of Overlay Entities (OEs), but located at strategically selected remote multihomed ASs is enough to control a significant part of the traffic for the most widely deployed kind of AS in the current Internet [66]. A major advantage of this framework is that no OEs are needed in any transit AS connecting the remote ASs in the overlay model.…”

Section: Overlay Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Alternatively, it is possible to conceive dynamic end-to-end inter-domain QoS without any kind of resource reservation, and to follow the IP connectionless paradigm, as long as only soft end-to-end QoS is guaranteed. Once again, the overlay approach arises as the perfect candidate to offer this kind of solution [65] and [66].…”

Section: Overlay Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, an attractive approach to inter-domain QoS Routing is to supply a complementary solution to the issue in which a completely distributed overlay architecture and a routing layer is used for dynamic QoS provisioning, while QoS extensions and/or TE capabilities of the underlying BGP layer are used for static QoS provisioning. In this sense, the overlay structure feeds from and reuses the best ongoing efforts in the area of in-band inter-domain QoS Routing for low dynamic QoS and/or TE provisioning [66]. Thus, in terms of the underlying inter-domain routing structure two types of BGP routers can operate, namely, non-QoS aware BGP routers and QoS aware BGP (QBGP) routers, where in order to develop highly scalable and stable routing schemes it is mandatory that QBGP routers only distribute non dynamic QoS information.…”

Section: Overlay Approachesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Research challenges in QoS routing

Masip-Bruin¹,

Yannuzzi

Domingo‐Pascual³

et al. 2006

Computer Communications

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quality of Service Routing is at present an active and remarkable research area, since most emerging network services require specialized Quality of Service (QoS) functionalities that cannot be provided by the current QoS-unaware routing protocols. The provisioning of QoS based network services is in general terms an extremely complex problem, and a significant part of this complexity lies in the routing layer. Indeed, the problem of QoS Routing with multiple additive constraints is known to be NP-hard. Thus, a successful and wide deployment of the most novel network services demands that we thoroughly understand the essence of QoS Routing dynamics, and also that the proposed solutions to this complex problem should be indeed feasible and affordable. This article surveys the most important open issues in terms of QoS Routing, and also briefly presents some of the most compelling proposals and ongoing research efforts done both inside and outside the E-Next Community to address some of those issues. q

show abstract

A Framework for Cooperative Inter-Domain QoS Routing

Fonte

Monteiro

Yannuzzi

et al.

IFIP International Federation for Information Processing

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Currently, a straightforward way to design BGP-based Traffic Engineering (TE) tools for stub Autonomous Systems (AS) is to rely on selfish routing mechanisms. Although TE tools can find an optimal solution, this optimum represents only a local optimum for outbound traffic. Indeed, this is one of the main limitations of the selfish routing approach. This approach makes the TE tools unaware of the effects of their route choices on transit AS throughout the chosen paths, due to uncoordinated routing decisions, and congestion can occur on distant intra-or inter-domain links. Thus, cooperation among AS is the key to avoid the performance degradation and routing instability caused by the selfish routing approach and it would be fundamental for the future QoS-aware Internet. With these objectives in mind this paper presents and discusses a framework for coordinated Inter-domain QoS Routing (QoSR) decisions among stub and downstream AS taking into account multiple traffic QoS constraints and routing preferences. The paper includes a description of the main mechanisms and algorithms that integrate the framework, and finally a discussion of the implementation issues.

show abstract

A Proposal for Inter-domain QoS Routing Based on Distributed Overlay Entities and QBGP

Cited by 10 publications

References 9 publications

Improving the Performance of Route Control Middleboxes in a Competitive Environment

Improving the Performance of Route Control Middleboxes in a Competitive Environment

Research challenges in QoS routing

A Framework for Cooperative Inter-Domain QoS Routing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About