Title: An Integrated, Distributed Traffic Control Strategy for Future Internet
1 An Integrated, Distributed Traffic Control
Strategy for Future Internet
- H. Che W. Su C. Lagoa X. ke, C. Liu,
Y. Cui - UTA Penn State Tsinghua
2Outline
- Problems
- Strategy
- Conclusions
3Problems
- Limitations of the existing distributed traffic
control solutions - Solutions at different layers are developed
independent of one another. As a result, they may
adversely interact with one another, attempting
to achieve conflicting design objectives 12 - They are largely empirical by design, without
provable properties, such as stability and
optimality - The existing theoretical results have limited
scope (e.g., single-domain, single CoS, allowing
limited number of design objectives). They cannot
be used to guide the protocol development to
enable rich service quality features, including
Quality-of-Service (QoS), Traffic-Engineering
(TE), and Fast-Failure-Recovery (FFR) - Apparently, patching the Internet with add-on
traffic control Features at different - layers independently is problematic
-
- The aim of this work to develop a strategy for
integrated, multilayer - protocol development to enable rich service
quality features at global scale, - including QoS, TE, and FFR
-
1 L. Qiu, Y. R. Yang, Y. Zhang, and S.
Shenker, On Selfish Routing in Internet-Like
Environments, ACM SIGCOMM'2003, Aug. 2003.
2 Y. Liu, H. Zhang, W. Gong, D. Towsley, On
the Interaction Between Overlay Routing and
Underlying Routing," IEEE INFOCOM'05
4An Integrated Strategy
- Outline
- A theoretical foundation
- An integrated control structure
-
5Theoretical Foundation
- Idea to make use of a distributed, QoS-aware,
multipath forwarding paradigm - This forwarding paradigm is enabled by two large
families of optimal, distributed controllers - (allowing unlimited number of design objectives,
multipath, and multi-CoS) - end-to-end require single-bit binary feedback,
allowing pure end-to-end control at transport
layer - edge-to-edge allow multi-domain edge-to-edge
per-hop control at IP layer - An Internet access point performs single-hop
control to enable CoS features for CoS-based flow
aggregates - A domain edge nodes performs CoS-agnostic control
to enable TE and FFR features for
destination-based flow aggregates inter-domain
per-hop control and intra-domain edge-to-edge
control (with or without involvement of core
nodes for feedback control)
QoS-aware end-to-end control
CoS-aware access control
CoS-agnotic intra-domain control
CoS-agnotic inter-domain control
6Theoretical Foundation
- Why the two families of controllers help
- They make it possible to develop distributed
traffic control protocols based on THEORY to
enable rich QoS, TE, and FFR features at global
scale - They are highly scalable and can deal with
tussles and network diversities
7Integrated Control Structure
- Outline
- IP layer and overlay integration
- IP layer and transport layer integration
8Integrated Control Structure
- IP layer and overlay integration
- Goal to minimize adverse interactions between
overlay traffic control and IP layer traffic
control - Our Solution let a network-based overlay service
network involves all the IP domain edge nodes
under its coverage so that our multi-domain
control mechanism can be simultaneously applied
to both the IP layer and overlay in an integrated
fashion
9Integrated Control Structure
- IP layer and transport layer integration
- Goals
- To minimize adverse interactions between IP rate
adaptation for TE and transport layer adaptation - To minimize the effect of IP rate adaptation for
TE on transport layer rate guaranteed flows - Solution
- Implementing three CoSs at IP layer BE, AF with
a target rate, and an upper bounded rate service - All the adaptive end-to-end flows (e.g., TCP) are
mapped to the upper bounded rate service without
call admission control - All the rate guaranteed end-to-end flows are
mapped to the AF CoS with call admission control - All the non-adaptive BE end-to-end flows (e.g.,
BE UDP) are mapped to the BE CoS
10Conclusions
- Developed a strategy for traffic control protocol
development - at multiple layers, possessing the following
expected features - They are integrated, achieving non-conflicting
design objectives - they provide rich service quality features,
including QoS, TE, and FFR - They can deal with network diversities and
tussles - They enjoy provable properties such as
scalability, stability, and optimality - Caveat The above expected features are derived
from a theoretical Framework based on a
fluid-flow model. It is a work-in-progress. How
closely the protocols developed based on this
strategy will achieve the above expected features
is subject to future investigation