2013 21st Signal Processing and Communications Applications Conference (SIU) 2013
DOI: 10.1109/siu.2013.6531353
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Performance evaluation of Multiple Routing Configurations

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
9
0

Year Published

2015
2015
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

1
4

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(9 citation statements)
references
References 11 publications
0
9
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The RLFA router may be several hops away from the source router S. The RLFA mechanism can provide a higher repair coverage than the basic LFA, but at the cost of higher computational complexity . Another existing, though less common IPFRR mechanisms are Equal‐cost multi‐path (ECMP), Multiple Routing Configurations (MRC), Not‐Via Addresses, tunnel based approaches, Maximally Redundant Trees (MRT) and other spanning tree based IPFRR approaches; we will not discuss these in detail. Some of existing IPFRR mechanisms can provide a high level of repair coverage reaching almost 100% (Not‐Via Addresses, MRC, MRT) .…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…The RLFA router may be several hops away from the source router S. The RLFA mechanism can provide a higher repair coverage than the basic LFA, but at the cost of higher computational complexity . Another existing, though less common IPFRR mechanisms are Equal‐cost multi‐path (ECMP), Multiple Routing Configurations (MRC), Not‐Via Addresses, tunnel based approaches, Maximally Redundant Trees (MRT) and other spanning tree based IPFRR approaches; we will not discuss these in detail. Some of existing IPFRR mechanisms can provide a high level of repair coverage reaching almost 100% (Not‐Via Addresses, MRC, MRT) .…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This makes the IPFRR mechanisms dependent on the presence of link‐state routing protocols. This fact limits the usability of RLFA, MRC, MRT, or Not Via Addresses . The rest of listed IPFRR mechanisms (LFA, ECMP) also works with distance‐vector routing protocols.…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Our previous work shows that the number of VTs that should be constructed by MRC highly depends on the structure of network topologies. This implies that the performance of MRC may differ even for topologies with the same number of nodes and densities.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, the number of VTs required by MRC to successfully isolate each node in one of the VTs should be kept as small as possible because higher number of VTs consume more network resources as MTR-based IPFRR requires the computation of an SPF tree and the maintenance of forwarding states in routers for each VT [7,8]. Using realistic ISP topologies, we evaluated the number of VTs needed by MRC for a successful termination in [9] where the results showed that the structural properties of network topologies that affect the performance of MRC cannot be characterized solely by the network size and density. Therefore, we investigated the other structural metrics of network topologies that possibly affect the number of VTs in [10] using our automation tool, whose experimental results showed that there is a correlation between the performance of MRC and the number of hub nodes in a topology that have a much higher degree compared with the other nodes.The VT construction algorithm presented in [7] to reduce the number of VTs in MRC increases the complexity of the forwarding process in routers.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%