Journal of Network and Systems Management

, Volume 24, Issue 3, pp 470–490 | Cite as

Loop-Free Alternates with Loop Detection for Fast Reroute in Software-Defined Carrier and Data Center Networks

Article

Abstract

Loop-Free Alternates (LFAs) are a local fast-reroute mechanism defined for IP networks. They are simple but suffer from two drawbacks. Firstly, some flows cannot be protected due to missing LFAs, i.e., this concept does not provide full protection coverage, which depends on network topology. Secondly, some LFAs cause loops in case of node or multiple failures. Avoiding those LFAs decreases the protection coverage even further. In this work, we propose to apply LFAs to OpenFlow-based networks. We suggest a method for loop detection so that loops can be avoided without decreasing protection coverage. We propose an implementation with OpenFlow that requires only a single additional flow rule per switch. We further investigate the percentage of flows that can be protected, not protected, or even create loops in different types of failure scenarios. We consider realistic ring and mesh networks as well as typical topologies for data center networks. None of them can be fully protected with LFAs. Therefore, we suggest an augmented fat-tree topology which allows LFAs to protect against all single link and node failures and against most double failures.

Keywords

Software-defined networking OpenFlow Resilience Loop-free alternates Scalability 

References

  1. 1.
    McKeown, N., Anderson, T., Balakrishnan, H., Parulkar, G., Peterson, L., Rexford, J., Shenker, S., Turner, J.: OpenFlow: enabling innovation in campus networks. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 38(2), 69–74 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Braun, W., Menth, M.: Wildcard compression of inter-domain routing tables for OpenFlow-based software-defined networking. In: European Workshop on Software Defined Networks (EWSDN), pp. 25–30 (2014)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sharma, S., Staessens, D., Colle, D., Pickavet, M., Demeester, P.: OpenFlow: meeting carrier-grade recovery requirements. Comput. Commun. 36(6), 656–665 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kempf, J., Bellagamba, E., Kern, A., Jocha, D., Takàcs, A., Sköldström, P.: Scalable fault management for OpenFlow. In: IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC), pp. 6606–6610 (2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    van Adrichem, N.L., van Asten, B.J., Kuipers, F.A.: Fast recovery in software-defined networks. In: European Workshop on Software Defined Networks (EWSDN), pp. 61–66 (2014)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ramos, R.M., Martinello, M., Rothenberg, C.E.: SlickFlow: resilient source routing in data center networks unlocked by OpenFlow. In: IEEE Conference on Local Computer Networks (LCN) (2013)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Atlas, A., Zinin, A.: RFC5286: Basic Specification for IP Fast Reroute: Loop-Free Alternates. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5286 (2008)
  8. 8.
    Bryant, S., Filsfils, C., Previdi, S., Shand, M., So, N.: Remote LFA FRR. http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-rtgwg-remote-lfa (2013)
  9. 9.
    Csikor, L., Retvari, G.: IP Fast Reroute with remote loop-free alternates: the unit link cost case. In: IEEE International Workshop on Reliable Networks Design and Modeling (RNDM) (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Menth, M., Braun, W.: Performance comparison of not-via addresses and maximally redundant trees (MRTs). In: IFIP/IEEE International Symposium on Integrated Network Management (IM), Ghent, Belgium (2013)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Martin, R., Menth, M., Hartmann, M., Cicic, T., Kvalbein, A.: Loop-free alternates and not-via addresses: a proper combination for IP fast reroute? Comput. Netw. 54(8), 1300–1315 (2010)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hartmann, M., Hock, D., Menth, M.: Routing optimization for IP networks with loop-free alternates. Comput. Netw. 95, 35–50 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pan, P., Swallow, G., Atlas, A.: RFC4090: Fast Reroute Extensions to RSVP-TE for LSP Tunnels. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc4090 (2005)
  14. 14.
    Pioro, M., Tomaszewski, A., Zukowski, C., Hock, D., Hartmann, M., Menth, M. Optimized IP-based vs. explicit paths for one-to-one backup in MPLS fast reroute. In: International Telecommunication Network Strategy and Planning Symposium (Networks), Warsaw, Poland (2010)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Meiners, C.R., Liu, A.X., Torng, E.: Bit weaving: a non-prefix approach to compressing packet classifiers in TCAMs. IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw. 20(2), 488–500 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Couto, R., Campista, M., Costa, L. A reliability analysis of datacenter topologies. In: IEEE Globecom, pp. 1890–1895 (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    OpenFlow Switch Consortium and others. OpenFlow Switch Specification Version 1.1.0. (2011). [Online]. Available: http://archive.openflow.org/documents/openflow-spec-v1.1.0.pdf
  18. 18.
    Menth, M., Duelli, M., Martin, R., Milbrandt, J.: Resilience analysis of packet-switched communication networks. IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw. 17(6), 1950–1963 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Knight, S., Nguyen, H.X., Falkner, N., Bowden, R., Roughan, M.: The internet topology zoo. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 29(9), 1765–1775 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Al-Fares, M., Loukissas, A., Vahdat, A.: A scalable, commodity data center network architecture. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 38(4), 63–74 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Banikazemi, M., Olshefski, D., Shaikh, A., Tracey, J., Wang, G.: Meridian: an SDN platform for cloud network services. IEEE Commun. Mag. 51(2), 120–127 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Guo, C., Lu, G., Li, D., Wu, H., Zhang, X., Shi, Y., Tian, C., Zhang, Y., Lu, S. BCube: a high performance, server-centric network architecture for modular data centers. In: ACM SIGCOMM, Barcelona, Spain (2009)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Guo, C., Wu, H., Tan, K., Shi, L., Zhang, Y., Lu, S.: Dcell: a scalable and fault-tolerant network structure for data centers. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 38(4), 75–86 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of TübingenTübingenGermany

Personalised recommendations