Advertisement

Stability and Scalability Issues in Hop-by-Hop Class-Based Routing

  • Marília Curado
  • Orlando Reis
  • João Brito
  • Gonçalo Quadros
  • Edmundo Monteiro
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2601)

Abstract

An intra-domain Quality of Service (QoS) routing protocol for the Differentiated Services framework is being developed at the University of Coimbra (UC-QoSR). The main contribution of this paper is the evaluation of the scalability and stability characteristics of the protocol on an experimental test-bed. The control of protocol overhead is achieved through a hybrid approach of metrics quantification and threshold based diffusion of routing messages. The mechanisms to avoid instability are: (i) a class-pinning mechanism to control instability due to frequent path shifts; (ii) the classification of routing messages in the class of highest priority to avoid the loss of accuracy of routing information. The results show that a hop-by-hop, link-state routing protocol, like Open Shortest Path First, can be extended to efficiently support class-based QoS traffic differentiation. The evaluation shows that scalability and stability under high loads and a large number of flows is achieved on the UC-QoSR strategy.

Keywords

Scalability Issue Traffic Class Protocol Overhead Traffic Differentiation Protocol Dynamic 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    R. Braden, D. Clark, S. Shenker, “Integrated Services in the Internet Architecture: an Overview”, Request For Comments 1633, Internet Engineering Task Force, June 1994.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    S. Blake, D. Black, M. Carlson, E. Davies Nortel, W. Weiss, “An Architecture for Differentiated Services”, Internet Engineering Task Force, Request for Comments 2475, December 1998.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    J. Moy, “OSPF Version 2”, Internet Engineering Task Force, Request For Comments 2328, April 1998.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    M. Oliveira, J. Brito, B. Melo, G. Quadros, E. Monteiro, “Quality of Service Routing in the Differentiated Services Framework”, Proceedings of SPIE’s International Symposium on Voice, Video, and Data Communications (Internet III: Quality of Service and Future Directions), Boston, Massachusetts, USA, November 5–8,2000.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    M. Oliveira, J. Brito, B. Melo, G. Quadros, E. Monteiro, “Evaluation of a Quality of Service Routing Strategy for the Differentiated Services Framework”, Proceedings of the 2001 International Conference on Internet Computing (IC’2001), Monte Carlo Resort, Las Vegas, Nevada, USA, June 25–28, 2001.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    A. Khanna, J. Zinky, “The Revised ARPANET Routing Metric”, Proceedings of SIGCOMM’89, Austin, Texas, September 19–22,1989Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    R. Guérin, S. Kamat, A. Orda, T. Przygienda, D. Williams, “QoS Routing Mechanisms and OSPF Extensions” Internet Engineering Task Force, Request For Comments 2676, August 1999.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Z. Wang, J. Crowcroft, “Shortest Path First with Emergency Exits”, Proceedings of SIGCOMM’90, Philadelphia, USA, September 1990.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    S. Vutukury and J.J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves, “A Simple Approximation to Minimum-Delay Routing”, Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM’99, Harvard University Science Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, 31 August–3 September, 1999.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    K. Nahrstedt, S. Chen, “Coexistence of QoS and Best Effort Flows-Routing and Scheduling”, Proceedings of 10th IEEE Tyrrhenian International Workshop on Digital Communications: Multimedia Communications, Ischia, Italy, September, 1998.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Q. Ma, P. Steenkiste, “Supporting Dynamic Inter-Class Resource Sharing: A Multi-Class QoS Routing Algorithm”, Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM’99, New York, USA, March 1999.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    A. Shaikh, J. Rexford, K. Shin, “Load-Sensitive Routing of Long-Lived IP Flows”, Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM’99, Harvard University Science Center, Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA, August 31–September 3,1999.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    P. Van Mieghem, H. De Neve and F. Kuipers, “Hop-by-hop Quality of Service Routing”, Computer Networks, vol. 37. No 3-4, pp. 407–423,2000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. [14]
    J. Wang, K. Nahrstedt, “Hop-by-Hop Routing Algorithms for Premium-class Traffic in DiffServ Networks”, Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM 2002, New York, NY, June, 2002.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    G. Apostolopoulos, R. Guerin, S. Kamat, and S. Tripathi. “Quality of Service Based Routing: A Performance Perspective”, Proceedings of SIGCOMM’98, Vancouver, British Columbia, September 1998.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    B. Lekovic, P. Van Mieghem, “Link State Update Policies for Quality of Service Routing”, Proceedings of Eighth IEEE Symposium on Communications and Vehicular Technology in the Benelux (SCVT2001), Delft, The Netherlands, October 18, 2001.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    G. Quadros, A. Alves, E. Monteiro, F. Boavida, “An Approach to Support Traffic Classes in IP Networks”, Proceedings of QoFIS’2000-The First International Workshop on Quality of future Internet Services, Berlin, Germany, September 25–26, 2000.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    Z. Wang, J. Crowcroft, “Quality of Service Routing for Supporting Multimedia Applications”, IEEEJSAC,, vol. 14. No 7, pp. 1228–1234, September 1996.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    H. De Neve, P. Van Mieghem, “TAMCRA: A Tunable Accuracy Multiple Constraints Routing Algorithm”, Computer Communications, 2002, Vol. 23, pp. 667–679.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. [20]
    A. Shaikh, A. Varma, L. Kalampoukas and R. Dube, “Routing stability in congested networks” Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM’00, August 28–Sepetmber 1, Grand Hotel, Stockholm, Sweden, 2000.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    A. Basu, J. Riecke, “Stability Issues in OSPF Routing”, Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM’01, San Diego, California, USA, August 27–31, 2001.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Marília Curado
    • 1
  • Orlando Reis
    • 1
  • João Brito
    • 1
  • Gonçalo Quadros
    • 1
  • Edmundo Monteiro
    • 1
  1. 1.Laboratory of Communications and Telematics CISUC/DEIUniversity of CoimbraCoimbraPortugal

Personalised recommendations