Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

1/27 Evaluating Potential Routing Diversity for Internet Failure Recovery *Chengchen Hu, + Kai Chen, + Yan Chen, *Bin Liu *Tsinghua University, + Northwestern.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "1/27 Evaluating Potential Routing Diversity for Internet Failure Recovery *Chengchen Hu, + Kai Chen, + Yan Chen, *Bin Liu *Tsinghua University, + Northwestern."— Presentation transcript:

1 1/27 Evaluating Potential Routing Diversity for Internet Failure Recovery *Chengchen Hu, + Kai Chen, + Yan Chen, *Bin Liu *Tsinghua University, + Northwestern University

2 2/27 Internet Failures  Failure is part of everyday life in IP networks  e.g., 675,000 excavation accidents in 2004 [Common Ground Alliance]  Network cable cuts every few days …  Real-world emergencies or disasters can lead to substantial Internet disruption  Earthquakes  Storms  Terrorist incident: 9.11 event  …

3 3/27 Example: Taiwan earthquake incident  Large earthquakes hit south of Taiwan on 26 December 2006  Only two of nine cross-sea cables not affected  There were still abundant physical level connectivity there, but it took too long for ISPs to find them and use them. 3 figures cited from "Aftershocks from the Taiwan Earthquakes: Shaking up Internet transit in Asia, NANOG42"

4 4/27 How reliable the Internet is?  Internet is not as reliable as people expected! [Wu, CoNEXT’07]  32% ASes are vulnerable to a single critical customer- provider link cut  93.7% Tier-1 ISP’s single-homed customers are lost from the peered ISP due to Tier-1 depeering  Our question: can we find more resources to increase the Internet reliability especially when Internet emergency happens?

5 5/27 Roadmap  Background  Where are the potential resources?  How much potential resources are there?  How to use the potential resources?

6 6/27 Basic Idea  Two places where we can find more routing diversities:  Internet eXchange Points (IXPs)  Co-location where multiple ASes exchange their traffic  Participant ASes in an IXP may not be connected via BGP  Internet valley-free routing policy  AS relationships: customer-provider, peering, sibling  Peering relaxation (PR): allow one AS to carry traffic from the other to its provider  Mentioned in [Wu, CoNEXT’07], but no evaluation  Our main focus:  How much can we gain from these two potential resources, i.e., IXP and PR?

7 7/27 Roadmap  Background  Where are the potential resources?  How much help could provide?  How to use the potential resources?

8 8/27 Dataset for Evaluation  Most complete AS topology graph  BGP data  Route Views, RIPE/RIS, Abilene, CERNET BGP View  P2P traceroute  Traceroute data from 992, 000 IPs in over 3, 700 ASes  In total, 120K AS links with AS relationships  s.html [Chen et al, CoNEXT’09]  IXP data  PCH + Peeringdb + Euro-IX (~200 IXPs)  3468 participant ASes

9 9/27 Failure Models  Tier-1 depeering  Real example: Cogent and Level3 depeering  Tier-1 provider-customer link teardown  Reported in NANOG forum  Mixed types of link breakdown  9.11 event, Taiwan earthquakes, 2003 Northeast blackout

10 10/27 Evaluation Metrics  Recovery Ratio  # of recovered AS pairs versus total # of affected AS pairs  Path Diversity  # of increased link-disjoint AS paths between affected AS pairs  Shifted Path  # of link-disjoint AS paths shifted onto a normal link after we use IXP or PR resources More results please check our report "Evaluating Potential Routing Diversity for Internet Failure

11 11/27 Results: Tier-1 Depeering  36 experiments for 9 Tier-1 ASes  Recovery ratio: most of the lost AS pairs can be recovered

12 12/27 Results: Tier-1 Depeering  Path diversity: multiple AS paths between lost AS pairs

13 13/27 Results: Tier-1 Depeering  Shifted path  On average, 3.75 ~ 17.2 for all 36 experiments  Moderate traffic load shifted onto the unaffected links

14 14/27 Roadmap  Background  Where are the potential resources?  How much help could provide?  How to use the potential resources?

15 15/27 Economic model  B pays to A for recovery  Business model  Risk alliance (like airlines): price is determined beforehand  pay on bandwidth & duration or bits (95 percentile) A B peer A B P-C A B A B IXP

16 16/27 Communication channel  Search for peers  Have direct connections to peers  Search for co-located ASes in the same IXP  ASes are connected by switches in modern IXPs  Messages are broadcasted via switches  Message confidentiality through public key crypto

17 17/27 Automatic communications: query phase victim AS potential helper A potential helper D potential helper B potential helper C who can connect to specific destination ASes? query

18 18/27 Automatic communications: Check availability victim AS potential helper A potential helper D potential helper B potential helper C 1. Check connectivity (traceroute) 2. Check available bandwidth (IGI/Yaz/pathload/spruce)

19 19/27 Automatic communications: reply phase victim AS potential helper A potential helper D potential helper B potential helper C I can provide X bandwidth to it reply I can provide Y bandwidth to it Message confidentiality with public key crypto

20 20/27 Automatic communications: ACK phase victim AS potential helper A potential helper D potential helper B potential helper C I would like buy Z (<=Y) ACK

21 21/27 Automatic communications: new BGP session victim AS potential helper A potential helper D potential helper B potential helper C Set up BGP session Can be withdrawn later

22 22/27 Optimal selection of helper ISPs  From a single victim ISP perspective  Buy transit from a minimal number of ASes  Recover all the (prioritized) traffic  Least cost

23 23/27 Selection heuristic Lost connectivity to {Di}, with bandwidth demand {Bi} is how much bandwidth AS j could provide to Di;

24 24/27 Selection heuristic Lost connectivity to {Di}, with bandwidth demand {Bi} Score each (helper) AS j with Select the AS with largest score (select the one with lowest price if same score)

25 25/27 Selection heuristic Update Lost connectivity to {Di}, with bandwidth demand {Bi} updated

26 26/27 Selection heuristic rescore and select Lost connectivity to {Di}, with bandwidth demand {Bi}

27 27/27 Summary  Point out a new venue for Internet failure recovery.  Evaluate the potential routing diversity via IXP and PR with the most complete AS topology graph.  40%-80% of affected AS pairs can be recovered via IXP and PR with multiple paths and moderate shifted paths.  Possible and practical mechanisms to utilize potential routing diversity.  Look forward to feedback and collaborations from IXP/ISPs!


Download ppt "1/27 Evaluating Potential Routing Diversity for Internet Failure Recovery *Chengchen Hu, + Kai Chen, + Yan Chen, *Bin Liu *Tsinghua University, + Northwestern."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google