1 / 49

Control Plane Issues in the Internet: Personal Perspective

Control Plane Issues in the Internet: Personal Perspective. 2005.4.11. Monday Microsoft Research Asia Beijing, China Sue B. Moon Division of Computer Science Dept. of EECS KAIST. Overview. Personal Perspective Single-Hop Delay Point-to-Point Delay Routing Anomaly

harley
Download Presentation

Control Plane Issues in the Internet: Personal Perspective

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Control Plane Issues in the Internet: Personal Perspective 2005.4.11. Monday Microsoft Research Asia Beijing, China Sue B. Moon Division of Computer Science Dept. of EECS KAIST

  2. Overview • Personal Perspective • Single-Hop Delay • Point-to-Point Delay • Routing Anomaly • Path Multiplicity as a Value-Added Service

  3. Personal Experience at Sprint • When I first arrived, I heard … • “No loss” on Sprint backbone network • “Almost no delay” • “Cadillac brand of IP service”

  4. Monitors in San Jose PoP * All monitored links are OC3

  5. Min/Avg/Max Delay per Minute

  6. Link Utilization

  7. Single-Hop Delay Distribution

  8. Delay w/o Transmission Time (TT)

  9. Minimum Router Transit Time (MRTT)

  10. Is the queue work-conserving?

  11. Delay w/o TX and MRTT

  12. Min/Avg/Max Delay without Cisco Router Idiosyncracies

  13. Summary of Single-Hop Delay • Packet size is a major factor • Non-work-conserving behavior of a router is a main cause behind large delay (> 1ms) • Not much queueing observed

  14. Point-to-Point Delay

  15. Data Set 3 Delay Distributions

  16. Data Set 3 Hourly Delay Distributions

  17. Data Set 3 Path 3 Path 2 Path 1 Min delay of src/dst flow (Data Set 3) Identification of Constant Factors: Multi-Paths • Equal Cost Multi Paths (ECMP) • Src/Dst addresses, Router ID

  18. Three Paths Connectivity • Data Set 3 Fiber prop.delay 28ms 32ms 34ms

  19. Path 1 Path Separation of Data Set 3 • TTL difference • Minimum delay of flow (src ip, dst ip)

  20.  Identification of Constant Factors: Packet Size • Path transit time • Propagation + packet processing (packet size)

  21. Data Set 3 Removing Constant Factors Path1

  22. Data Set 3, Path 1 Variable Delay: Bulk

  23. Variable Delay: Bulk (cont’d) Data Set 3

  24. 90 Impact of Bottleneck Link Load

  25. Data Set 3, Path 1 Variable Delay Revisited: Tail

  26. Peaks in Variable Delay

  27. Closer Look • Queue Build up & Drain

  28. Summary of Pt-to-Pt Delay • Not much queueing most of the time • Severe congestion when bottleneck link utililization > 90% • Congestion periods longer than 1 sec • Exact causes unknown • Possible causes • Route changes

  29. Routing Loop

  30. Issues in "Good" Routing • Misbehaving routing protocols • BGP misconfigurations • Pathological behaviors • Frequent changes • Even under normal circumstances • Transient behaviors • Inter/intra-domain routing not well understood

  31. Scenario for a Transient Routing Loop In Normal Operation

  32. When a link fails, R1 is the first to detect.

  33. R3 is updated before R2.

  34. Finally R2 is updated, and the loop is resolved.

  35. CDF of Routing Loop Duration in Time

  36. VoIP experimental setup [Boutremans2002] • Traffic injected in the network: • 200 byte UDP packets • every 5ms. • Packets captured and timestamped at end-systems. • Traceroute runs continuously during the experiment. • Induced link failures on purpose to evalute convergence time and impact on e2e connections

  37. Information Sources • IS-IS & BGP listener logs • Router logs from both ends of “failing” links • Controlled bi-directional VoIP traffic between Reston and ATL • SNMP data

  38. ~3.4ms ~2.6ms 3 links up 2 links down 2 links up 3 links down Delays (1 sec timescale)

  39. When the two interfaces went down … 6.6 seconds

  40. Traffic “black-holed” for 0.975 seconds Traffic “black-holed” for 1.745 seconds For 30 secs packets follow a shorter path When three links came back up

  41. Approaches To Fix It • Fine-tuning parameters • Timer values [Alattinoglu2002] • Modify Routing Protocols • Suppress advertisement and perform local rerouting using a backwarding table [Lee04] • Centralized path computation [Feamster04,Rexford04]

  42. Our Approach • Key Idea: • Find disjoint overlay path and send duplicate packets • Assumptions • Sender and receiver both within an AS • Bidirectional link weights • Extra income for extra b/w consumption • Pros and cons • Advantages • No modification to current infrastructure • Selective use by only those that need it • Disadvantages • Extra b/w consumption

  43. Provisioning for Interactive Streaming • Interactive Streaming • Not a driving force behind b/w • A candidate for growing revenue • Examples • VoIP gradually taking over PSTN traffic • Remote video viewing at door by cell phone • Online game traffic • "Good" routing more important than bandwidth

  44. source destination Basic Ideas candidate relay nodes!!!

  45. Resilient to Failures

  46. What I have learned … • No loss, almost no delay • Almost. I gained insight into causes behind • Debunking the myths [Odlyzko2005] • Streaming real-time traffic • QoS • Content is king • Usage-sensitive pricing

  47. Other Issues Tackled • Traffic Matrix Estimation • Inspired by tomography in other fields • Before arrival of efficient NetFlow • Network Anomaly Detection • NIDS, IDS => PCA-based global monitoring • Optimization • Cross-layer resource allocation

  48. Future Work • Personal perspective • More into creating value-added services • MPLS/VPN performance issues

  49. Acknowledgements • Thank D. Papagiannaki, B.-Y. Choi, U. Hengartner, C. Boutresmans, G. Iannaccone, and M. Cha for help with the slides.

More Related