On the Sensitivity of Transit ASes to Internal Failures

  • Steve Uhlig
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 3751)

Abstract

Network robustness is something all providers are striving for without being able to know all the aspects it encompasses. A key aspect of network design is the sensitivity of the network to internal failures. In this paper we present an open-source tool implementing the sensitivity model of [1], allowing network operators to study the sensitivity of their network to internal failures. We apply our methodology on the GEANT network, and we show that some of the routers and links of GEANT are sensitive to internal failures. Our results indicate that improvements can be made to the network design so as to reduce the risk of disruptions due to internal failures. Furthermore, we show great consistency between the results of the control plane and the data plane, indicating that applying the analysis on the control plane might be sufficient to provide insight into how to improve the resilience of the network to internal failures.

Keywords

network design sensitivity analysis control and data planes BGP IGP 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Teixeira, R., Griffin, T., Voelker, G., Shaikh, A.: Network sensitivity to hot potato disruptions. In: Proc. of ACM SIGCOMM (August 2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Cahn, R.S.: Wide Area Network Design: Concepts and Tools for Optimisation. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1998)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Grover, W.D.: Mesh-Based Survivable Networks. Prentice Hall PTR, Englewood Cliffs (2004)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Teixeira, R., Shaikh, A., Griffin, T., Rexford, J.: Dynamics of hot-potato routing in IP networks. In: Proc. of ACM SIGMETRICS (June 2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Teixeira, R., Duffield, N., Rexford, J., Roughan, M.: Traffic matrix reloaded: impact of routing changes. In: Proc. of PAM 2005 (March 2005)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Moy, J.: OSPF: anatomy of an Internet routing protocol. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1998)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Oran, D.: OSI IS-IS intra-domain routing protocol. Request for Comments 1142, Internet Engineering Task Force (February 1990)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Stewart, J.: BGP4: interdomain routing in the Internet. Addison Wesley, Reading (1999)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cisco. BGP best path selection algorithm, http://www.cisco.com/warp/public/459/25.shtml
  10. 10.
    Rexford, J., Wang, J., Xiao, Z., Zhang, Y.: BGP Routing Stability of Popular Destinations. In: Proc. of ACM SIGCOMM Internet Measurement Workshop (November 2002)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Uhlig, S., Magnin, V., Bonaventure, O., Rapier, C., Deri, L.: Implications of the Topological Properties of Internet Traffic on Traffic Engineering. In: Proc. of ACM SAC 2004 (March 2004)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Quoitin, B., Uhlig, S.: Modeling the routing of an Autonomous System with C-BGP. To appear in IEEE Network Magazine, special issue on interdomain routing (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steve Uhlig
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computing Science and EngineeringUniversité catholique de LouvainLouvain-la-neuveBelgium

Personalised recommendations