GA3: scalable, distributed address assignment for dynamic data center networks

Abstract

Deployment and maintenance of current data center networks is costly and prone to errors. In order to avoid manual configuration, many of them require centralized administrators which constitute a clear bottleneck, while distributed approaches do not guarantee sufficient flexibility or robustness. This paper describes and evaluates GA3 (Generalized Automatic Address Assignment), a discovery protocol that assigns multiple unique labels to all the switches in a hierarchical network, without any modification of hosts or the standard Ethernet frames. Labeling is distributed and uses probes. These labels can be leveraged for shortest path routing without tables, as in the case of the Torii protocol, but GA3 also allows other label-based routing protocols (such as PortLand or ALIAS). Additionally, GA3 can detect miswirings in the network. Furthermore, control traffic is only necessary upon network deployment rather than periodically. Simulation results showed a reduced convergence time of less than 2 s and 100 kB/s of bandwidth (to send the GA3 frames) in the worst case for popular data center topologies, which outperforms other similar protocols.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Notes

  1. 1.

    A pod is a group of switches that share connectivity via links not coming from a core. S4 and S5 belong to the same pod; but not S5 and S6, as they are only connected through the core S1.

  2. 2.

    It might happen that 1.5.4. arrives earlier than 1.1.2. and is then propagated to S3, but it would subsequently be stopped at S3, which has a higher priority: 1.1.

References

  1. 1.

    Walraed-Sullivan M, Mysore RN, Tewari M, Zhang Y, Marzullo K (2011) A Vahdat, ALIAS: Scalable, decentralized label assignment for data centers. In: SoCC, ACM, p 6

  2. 2.

    Agarwal R, Mudigonda J, Yalagandula P, Mogul JC (2015) An Algorithmic Approach to Datacenter Cabling, HP Laboratories, Tech. Rep HPL-2015-8

  3. 3.

    Potharaju R, Jain N (2013) When the network crumbles: an empirical study of cloud network failures and their impact on services. In: SoCC. ACM, pp 15:1–15:17

  4. 4.

    Xia Y, Schlansker M, Ng TSE, Tourrilhes J (2015) Enabling Topological Flexibility for Data Centers Using OmniSwitch. In: 7th USENIX Workshop on Hot Topics in Cloud Computing (HotCloud 15)

  5. 5.

    Curtis A, Carpenter T, Elsheikh M, Lopez-Ortiz A, Keshav S (2012) REWIRE: An optimization-based framework for unstructured data center network design. In: INFOCOM, 2012 Proceedings IEEE, pp 1116–1124

  6. 6.

    Walraed-Sullivan M, Mysore RN, Marzullo K, Vahdat A (2013) A Randomized Algorithm for Label Assignment in Dynamic Networks, Microsoft Research, Tech. Rep CS2013-0994

  7. 7.

    Jin X, Farrington N, Rexford J (2016) Your Data Center Switch is Trying Too Hard. In: ACM Symposium on SDN Research (SOSR 2016)

  8. 8.

    Rojas E, Ibanez G, Gimenez-Guzman JM, Rivera D, Azcorra A (Feb. 2015) Torii: multipath distributed Ethernet fabric protocol for data centres with zero-loss path repair. Transactions on Emerging Telecommunications Technologies 26(2):179–194

  9. 9.

    Rojas E, Ibanez G, Gimenez-Guzman JM, Carral JA, Garcia-Martinez A, Martinez-Yelmo I, Arco JM (2015) All-Path bridging: Path exploration protocols for data center and campus networks. Comput Netw 79:120–132

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Ramos RM, Martinello M, Rothenberg CE (2013) SlickFlow: Resilient source routing in Data Center Networks unlocked by OpenFlow. 38th Annual IEEE Conference on Local Computer Networks 0:606–613

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Al-Fares M, Loukissas A, Vahdat A (2008) A scalable, commodity data center network architecture. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 38(4):63–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    (2009) IEEE 802.1AB (LLDP) Specification

  13. 13.

    Niranjan Mysore R, Pamboris A, Farrington N, Huang N, Miri P, Radhakrishnan S, Subramanya V, Vahdat A (2009) PortLand: a scalable fault-tolerant layer 2 data center network fabric. SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev 39(4):39–50

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Greenberg A, Hamilton JR, Jain N, Kandula S, Kim C, Lahiri P, Maltz DA, Patel P, Sengupta S (2009) VL2: a scalable and flexible data center network. SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev 39(4):51–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Singh A, Ong J, Agarwal A, Anderson G, Armistead A, Bannon R, Boving S, Desai G, Felderman B, Germano P, Kanagala A, Provost J, Simmons J, Tanda E, Wanderer J, Hölzle U., Stuart S, Vahdat A (2015) Jupiter Rising: A Decade of Clos Topologies and Centralized Control in Google’s Datacenter Network. SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev 45(4):183–197

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Chen T, Gao X, Chen G (2016) The features, hardware, and architectures of data center networks: A survey. J Parallel Distrib Comput 96:45–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Rojas-Cessa R, Kaymak Y, Dong Z (2015) Schemes for Fast Transmission of Flows in Data Center Networks. IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials 17(3):1391–1422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Xia W, Zhao P, Wen Y, Xie H (2016) A Survey on Data Center Networking (DCN): Infrastructure and Operations. IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials 99:1–1

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    eTorii (GitHub).” [Online]. Available: https://github.com/gistnetserv-uah/eTorii

  20. 20.

    Farkas J, Farkas J, Salvador M, dos Santos G (2008) Automatic Discovery of Physical Topology in Ethernet Networks. In: AINA 2008 22nd International Conference on Advanced Information Networking and Applications, 2008, pp 848– 854

  21. 21.

    Chen K, Guo C, Wu H, Yuan J, Feng Z, Chen Y, Lu S, Wu W (2012) DAC: Generic and Automatic Address Configuration for Data Center Networks. IEEE/ACM Trans Networking 20(1):84–99

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Deng G, Wang H, Gong Z (2014) Tree-conf: A fast automatic address configuration method for tree-like data center networks. In: 2014 International Conference on Computing, Communication and Networking Technologies (ICCCNT), pp 1–6

  23. 23.

    Hu Y, Zhu M, Xia Y, Chen K, Luo Y (2012) GARDEN: Generic Addressing and Routing for Data Center Networks. In: 2012 IEEE 5th International Conference on Cloud Computing (CLOUD), pp 107–114

  24. 24.

    Fogel A, Fung S, Pedrosa L, Walraed-Sullivan M, Govindan R, Mahajan R, Millstein T (2015) A general approach to network configuration analysis, Networked Systems Design and Implementation

  25. 25.

    Ma X, Hu C, Chen K, Zhang C, Zhang H, Zheng K, Chen Y, Sun X (2012) Error Tolerant Address Configuration for Data Center Networks with Malfunctioning Devices. In: 2012 IEEE 32nd International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), pp 708–717

  26. 26.

    Jiang C, Liang W, Xu M, Liu L (2014) MTR: Fault tolerant routing in Clos data center network with miswiring links. In: 2014 IEEE 20th International Workshop on Local Metropolitan Area Networks (LANMAN), pp 1–6

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by grants from Comunidad de Madrid through Project TIGRE5-CM (S2013/ICE-2919).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Elisa Rojas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rojas, E., Alvarez-Horcajo, J., Martinez-Yelmo, I. et al. GA3: scalable, distributed address assignment for dynamic data center networks. Ann. Telecommun. 72, 693–702 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12243-017-0569-4

Download citation

Keywords

  • Data centers
  • Automatic address assignment
  • Misconfiguration detection
  • Shortest path bridges