1 / 18

Cabo: Concurrent Architectures are Better than One

Cabo: Concurrent Architectures are Better than One. Nick Feamster, Georgia Tech Lixin Gao, UMass Amherst Jennifer Rexford, Princeton. Network Virtualization. Flexible Network Topology. VINI: Virtual Network Infrastructure. Experimentation with new architectures (“bake off”)

Download Presentation

Cabo: Concurrent Architectures are Better than One

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. Cabo: Concurrent Architectures are Better than One Nick Feamster, Georgia TechLixin Gao, UMass AmherstJennifer Rexford, Princeton

  2. Network Virtualization

  3. Flexible Network Topology

  4. VINI: Virtual Network Infrastructure • Experimentation with new architectures (“bake off”) • Experiments can share same physical infrastructure • Important characteristics for repeatable experiments • Simultaneous experiments • Long-running “deployment studies” • Resource isolation UML XORP (routing protocols) eth0 eth1 eth2 eth3 Control Data Packet Forward Engine UmlSwitch element Tunnel table Click Filters

  5. Idea: Infrastructure is the Architecture • Pluralist:No single “winning” architecture • Simultaneously running architectures • Network Operations • Transitioning to new software, configurations, etc. • Different networks for different services (e.g., VoIP) • Security: sandboxing unwanted traffic • Topology-specific routing protocols • ISPs “rent” slices of resources to each other • Or, perhaps even rent resources from third parties

  6. Today: ISPs Serve Two Roles Role 1: Infrastructure Providers Role 2: Service Providers • Infrastructure providers: Maintain routers, links, data centers, other physical infrastructure • Service providers: Offer services (e.g., layer 3 VPNs, performance SLAs, etc.) to end users No single party has control over an end-to-end path.

  7. Coupling Causes Problems • Deployment stalemates:Secure routing, multicast, etc. • Focus on incremental deployability cripples us • Shrinking profits and commoditization: ISPs cannot enhance end-to-end service • No single ISP has purview over an entire path “How do you think they're going to get to customers? Through a broadband pipe.. we have spent this capital and we have to have a return … there's going to have to be some mechanism for these people who use these pipes to pay for the portion they're using.” –Edward Witacre • Peering Tiffs: End-to-end connectivity is in the balance “As of 5:30 am EDT, October 5th, [2005], Level(3) terminated peering with Cogent without cause…even though both Cogent and Level(3) remained in full compliance …We are extending a special offering to single homed Level 3 customers. Cogent will offer any Level 3 customer, who is single homed to the Level 3 network on the date of this notice, one year of full Internet transit free of charge at the same bandwidth currently being supplied by Level 3. …”

  8. Proposal: Concurrent Architectures are Better than One (“Cabo”) • The business entities that play these two roles may be the same in some cases • Infrastructure providers: maintain physical infrastructure needed to build networks • Service providers:lease “slices” of physical infrastructure from one or more providers

  9. Similar Trends in Other Industries • Commercial aviation • Infrastructure providers: Airports • Infrastructure: Gates, “hands and eyes”, etc. • Service providers: Airlines BOS ORD SFO ATL • Other examples: Automobile industry

  10. Communications Networks, Too! Two commercial examples • Packet Fabric: share routers at exchange points • FON: resells users’ wireless Internet connectivity Broker • Infrastructure providers: Buy upstream connectivity, broker access through wireless • Nomads: Users who connect to access points • Service provider: FON as broker

  11. Application #1: End-to-End Services • Secure routing protocols • Multi-provider VPNs • Paths with end-to-end performance guarantees Today Cabo Competing ISPs with different goals must coordinate Single service provider controls end-to-end path

  12. NYC Tokyo ATL Application #2: Virtual Co-Location • Problem: ISP/Enterprise wants presence in some physical location, but doesn’t have equipment there. • Today: Backhaul, or L3 VPN from single ISP • Cabo: Lease a slice of another’s routers, links

  13. Challenge #1: Embedding • Given: virtual network and physical network • Topology, constraints, etc. • Problem: find the appropriate mapping onto available physical resources (nodes and edges) • Many possible formulations • Specific nodes mapping to certain physical nodes • Generic requirements: “three diverse paths from SF to LA with 100 MBps throughput” • Traffic awareness, dynamic remapping, etc. • Approximate solutions

  14. Challenge #2: Simultaneous Operation • Problem: Service providers must share infrastructure • Approach: Virtualize the infrastructure • Nodes • PlanetLab • Virtual Machines • Virtual Routers • Links (previous lessons in QoS?) • Capabilities are similar to those needed for VINI • Many of the same functions needed • Likely more federation in Cabo

  15. Challenge #3: Substrate • Problem: Service providers must be able to request physical infrastructure (infrastructure providers must be able to instantiate it) • Discovering physical infrastructure • Decision elements (cf. 4D proposal) • Creating virtual networks • Requests to decision elements (initially out of band), which name virtual network components • Instantiating virtual networks • Challenges include embeddingand accounting

  16. Requirements • Router virtualization • Scheduling of node CPU, link bandwidth, etc. • Programmable software in each slice • Service providers will customize • Support for substrate • “Out-of-band” communication • Accounting: what bandwidth has been reserved?

  17. Economic Challenges • Service providers: great deal • Opportunity to add value by creating new services • Service differentiation • Infrastructure providers • Can being an infrastructure provider be profitable? • Who will become infrastructure providers vs. service providers?

  18. Summary • ISPs are infrastructure + service providers is problematic • Deployment stalemate • Commoditization • Cabo: “Concurrent Architectures are Better than One” • Separate infrastructure from service providers • Applications • Multi-provider VPNs, end-to-end services and protocols, … • Challenges • Simultaneous operation • Bootstrapping More Information: http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~feamster/papers/cabo-tr.pdf

More Related