1. Similar problems ALTO BOF - IETF 72 Dublin - July 29, 2008 D. Saucez¹, D. Papadimitriou², S. Previdi³, O. Bonaventure¹ ¹ Université catholique de Louvain ² Alcatel Bell ³ Cisco Systems

2. Dual stack hosts/routers will exist for many years  IPv4 and IPv6 performance (e.g., reliability) are not always equivalent [1] How to select the best stack ?  Example: always prefer IPv6 (like Windows Vista)? RFC 3484 static selection ? => determine the best path among several: {, } IPv4 vs IPv6 Dual Stack (DS) ISP 5 ISP 2 ISP 4 ISP 1 Ipv4 ISP 6 ISP 3 IPv6 ?? sd

3. Multi-Homing (MH) Multi-homing implies choice among multiple feasible paths with much varying properties [2]  AS-based MH: how to select the best path (ISP-based objectives)  Host-based MH: how to select the best path (customer-based objectives) => determine the best path among several: {, …,,, …, } ISP 5 ISP 2 ISP 4 ISP 1 ISP 6 ISP 3 ?? s d

4. Server replicas How to select the best replicas  within set {d a,d b,d c,d d }  per source: s 1, s 2, s 3 => determine the best replicaS among several: {,,, } ∀ i ISP 5 ISP 2 ISP 4 ISP 1 ISP 6 ISP 3 s2s2 s1s1 dada dbdb dcdc d s3s3

5. ALTO Best Peer Selection => a similar problem, but on a P2P infrastructure ISP 5 ISP 2 ISP 4 ISP 1 ISP 6 ISP 3 Selected peer Possible peer How to select the best peers set from the swarm  Example: selected peer set {p a,p c,p g } extracted from possible set {p a,p b,p c,p d,p e,p f,p g,p h }  per source: s 1 => determine the best peerS among several: {, …, } s

6. Conclusion IPv4 - IPv6 DS ∈ {, } MH ∈ {, …,,, …, } Server replication ⊆ {,,, } P2P Apps ⊆ {, …, } => General problem ⊆ {, …,,, …, } networkingALTO Best path selectio n ALL share a common problem: how to efficiently make best path selection ? for any s,d representation

7. Next Steps ALTO approach can be used for this common problem IF i) ALTO protocol format/syntax does not restrict ALTO protocol usability and extensibility ii) ALTO protocol supports different types of “transport addresses” including at least IPv4 and IPv6 addresses

8. Backup Slides

9. Dual stack hosts/routers will exist for many years  IPv4 and IPv6 performance (e.g., reliability) are not always equivalent [1] How to select the best stack ?  Example: always prefer IPv6 (like Windows Vista)? RFC 3484 static selection ? => determine the best path among several: {, } IPv4 vs IPv6 Dual Stack (DS) [1] X. Zhou et al., Ipv6 delay and loss performance evolution, IJCS 2008 ISP 5 ISP 2 ISP 4 ISP 1 Ipv4 ISP 6 ISP 3 IPv6 ?? sd

10. Multi-Homing (MH) Multi-homing implies choice among multiple feasible paths with much varying properties [2]  AS-based MH: how to select the best path (ISP-based objectives)  Host-based MH: how to select the best path (customer-based objectives) => determine the best path among several: {, …,,, …, } ISP 5 ISP 2 ISP 4 ISP 1 ISP 6 ISP 3 ?? s d [2] B. Quoitin et al., Evaluating the Benefits of the Locator/Identifier Separation, MobiArch 2007

11. Multihoming How to reduce the costs? How to finely control the costs (per customer? per flow? per ToS?) How to improve QoS experience without end-to- end reservation protocol? How to globally improve performances? How ISPs can control the Shim6 path selection algorithm? => determine the best paths among several

12. References [1] X. Zhou et al., Ipv6 delay and loss performance evolution, IJCS 2008 [2] B. Quoitin et al., Evaluating the Benefits of the Locator/Identifier Separation, MobiArch 2007 [3] A. Akella, S. A., and R. Sitaraman, A measurement-based analysis of multihoming, in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, 2003 [4] R. Gao et al., Avoiding Oscillations due to Intelligent Route Control Systems, IEEE INFOCOM, 2006 [5] C. de Launois et al., Leveraging network performance with IPv6 multihoming and multiple provider-dependent aggregatable prefixes, Computer Networks, 2006