p-Cycles: An overview

Asthana, Rachna; Singh, Yatindra Nath; Grover, W.D.

doi:10.1109/surv.2010.020110.00066

Cited by 64 publications

(25 citation statements)

References 57 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The study in [13] reveals that the major capacity gain of non-simple p-cycles over simple p-cycles lies in small networks with lightly-loaded traffic. In [15], the authors extended traditional p-tree by adding links to form a more flexible protection pattern, such as cycles, trails or trees. It is a link-based protection scheme and provides higher protection capacity than link-protecting simple and non-simple p-cycles.…”

Section: Background and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scalable, Optimal and Capacity Efficient Survivable Technique (SOCEST) for Optical Network

Garg¹

2017

IJFGCN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Background and Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Scalable, Optimal and Capacity Efficient Survivable Technique (SOCEST) for Optical Network

Garg¹

2017

IJFGCN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Some approaches enabling this techniques are pre-configured tree (p-Tree) [94] based on tree graphs, pre-configured cycles (p-Cycle) [92] based on cycle graphs, and pre-configured prism (p-Prism) [95] based on prism graphs. p-Cycle can be combined with pre-configured path (i.e., FIPP-p-Cycle and flow p-Cycle) [92], [93]. Figure 8 shows an example of FIPP-p-Cycles scheme used in a large and distributed cloud infrastructure (i.e., Inter-DCN) protecting traffic and connections from a double failure in the core or transmission network.…”

Section: Level Of Resiliency *mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Survey on Resiliency Techniques in Cloud Computing Infrastructures and Applications

Colman-Meixner

Develder

Tornatore

et al. 2016

IEEE Commun. Surv. Tutorials

127

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Today's businesses increasingly rely on cloud computing, which brings both great opportunities and challenges. One of the critical challenges is resiliency: disruptions due to failures (either accidental or because of disasters or attacks) may entail significant revenue losses (e.g., US$ 25.5 billion in 2010 for North America). Such failures may originate at any of the major components in a cloud architecture (and propagate to others): (i) the servers hosting the application, (ii) the network interconnecting them (on different scales, inside a data center, up to wide-area connections), or (iii) the application itself. We comprehensively survey a large body of work focusing on resilience of cloud computing, in each (or a combination) of the server, network, and application components.First, we present the cloud computing architecture and its key concepts. We highlight both the infrastructure (servers, network) and application components. A key concept is virtualization of infrastructure (i.e., partitioning into logically separate units), and thus we detail the components in both physical and virtual layers. Before moving to the detailed resilience aspects, we provide a qualitative overview of the types of failures that may occur (from the perspective of the layered cloud architecture), and their consequences.The second major part of the paper introduces and categorizes a large number of techniques for cloud computing infrastructure resiliency. This ranges from designing and operating the facilities, servers, networks, to their integration and virtualization (e.g., also including resilience of the middleware infrastructure).The third part focuses on resilience in application design and development. We study how applications are designed, installed, and replicated to survive multiple physical failure scenarios as well as disaster failures.

show abstract

“…A review of several p-cycle based protection (for link, segment, path, and flow) approaches can be found in [30]. p-cycles can also be utilized to protect multicast traffic trees [30,31].…”

Section: Literature Review Of Resilient Routing Issuesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resilient arcs and node disjointness in diverse routing

Gomes

Żotkiewicz

2014

Optical Switching and Networking

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In multi-layer networks protection can be provided at multiple layers. Hence some links at an upper layer may be resilient because they are protected at a lower layer. We will designate as resilient arc at a given layer, an arc which has some form of protection at an underlaying layer. When path diversity is used at an upper layer, and resilient arcs are taken into account, it may not be necessary for the considered paths to be fully disjoint.We solve a problem of finding the shortest node-disjoint pair of paths that can share resilient arcs. It is assumed that a network consists of a set of nodes and a set of arcs. Moreover, a number of available arcs are resilient. Our goal is to find the shortest pair of paths such that they share only those nodes that are incident to shared resilient arcs. Moreover, we assume that the resulting paths cannot contain loops, and costs of shared resilient arcs are counted only once towards the objective function.In the paper we present two novel algorithms solving the above problem, and two supporting algorithms that are utilized as subroutines. We implement the proposed algorithms and compare them to an MIP approach.

show abstract

p-Cycles: An overview

Cited by 64 publications

References 57 publications

Scalable, Optimal and Capacity Efficient Survivable Technique (SOCEST) for Optical Network

Scalable, Optimal and Capacity Efficient Survivable Technique (SOCEST) for Optical Network

A Survey on Resiliency Techniques in Cloud Computing Infrastructures and Applications

Resilient arcs and node disjointness in diverse routing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About