Path Trading: Fast Algorithms, Smoothed Analysis, and Hardness Results

  • André Berger
  • Heiko Röglin
  • Ruben van der Zwaan
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6630)

Abstract

The Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) serves as the main routing protocol of the Internet and ensures network reachability among autonomous systems (ASes). When traffic is forwarded between the many ASes on the Internet according to that protocol, each AS selfishly routes the traffic inside its own network according to some internal protocol that supports the local objectives of the AS. We consider possibilities of achieving higher global performance in such systems while maintaining the objectives and costs of the individual ASes. In particular, we consider how path trading, i.e. deviations from routing the traffic using individually optimal protocols, can lead to a better global performance. Shavitt and Singer (“Limitations and Possibilities of Path Trading between Autonomous Systems”, INFOCOM 2010) were the first to consider the computational complexity of finding such path trading solutions. They show that the problem is weakly NP-hard and provide a dynamic program to find path trades between pairs of ASes.

In this paper we improve upon their results, both theoretically and practically. First, we show that finding path trades between sets of ASes is also strongly NP-hard. Moreover, we provide an algorithm that finds all Pareto-optimal path trades for a pair of two ASes. While in principal the number of Pareto-optimal path trades can be exponential, in our experiments this number was typically small. We use the framework of smoothed analysis to give theoretical evidence that this is a general phenomenon, and not only limited to the instances on which we performed experiments. The computational results show that our algorithm yields far superior running times and can solve considerably larger instances than the previous dynamic program.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Akella, A., Maggs, B., Seshan, S., Shaikh, A., Sitaraman, R.: A measurement-based analysis of multihoming. In: SIGCOMM, pp. 353–364 (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Beier, R., Röglin, H., Vöcking, B.: The smoothed number of pareto optimal solutions in bicriteria integer optimization. In: Fischetti, M., Williamson, D.P. (eds.) IPCO 2007. LNCS, vol. 4513, pp. 53–67. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dai, R., Stahl, D.O., Whinston, A.B.: The economics of smart routing and quality of service. In: Stiller, B., Carle, G., Karsten, M., Reichl, P. (eds.) NGC 2003 and ICQT 2003. LNCS, vol. 2816, pp. 318–331. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Goldenberg, D.K., Qiu, L., Xie, H., Yang, Y.R., Zhang, Y.: Optimizing cost and performance for multihoming. In: SIGCOMM, pp. 79–82 (2004)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Knuth, D.: The Art of Computer Programming, 3rd edn. Sorting and Searching, vol. 3. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1997)MATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Liu, Y., Reddy, A.L.N.: Multihoming route control among a group of multihomed stub networks. Computer Comm. 30(17), 3335–3345 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Mahajan, R., Wetherall, D., Anderson, T.: Negotiation-based routing between neighboring ISPs. In: NSDI, pp. 29–42 (2005)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nemhauser, G.L., Ullmann, Z.: Discrete dynamic programming and capital allocation. Management Science 15(9), 494–505 (1969)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Quoitin, B., Bonaventure, O.: A cooperative approach to interdomain traffic engineering. In: EuroNGI (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Röglin, H., Teng, S.-H.: Smoothed Analysis of Multiobjective Optimization. In: FOCS, pp. 681–690 (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sevcik, P., Bartlett, J.: Improving user experience with route control. Technical Report NetForecast Report 5062, NetForecast, Inc. (2002)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shavitt, Y., Shir, E.: DIMES: let the Internet measure itself. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 35(5), 71–74 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Shavitt, Y., Singer, Y.: Limitations and Possibilities of Path Trading between Autonomous Systems. In: INFOCOM (2010)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Shrimali, G., Akella, A., Mutapcic, A.: Cooperative interdomain traffic engineering using nash bargaining and decomposition. In: INFOCOM, pp. 330–338 (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Spielman, D.A., Teng, S.-H.: Smoothed analysis of algorithms: why the simplex algorithm usually takes polynomial time. Journal of the ACM 51(3), 385–463 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Spielman, D.A., Teng, S.-H.: Smoothed analysis: an attempt to explain the behavior of algorithms in practice. Communic. of the ACM 52(10), 76–84 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Teixeira, R., Shaikh, A., Griffin, T., Rexford, J.: Dynamics of hot-potato routing in IP networks. In: SIGMETRICS, pp. 307–319 (2004)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Winick, J., Jamin, S., Rexford, J.: Traffic engineering between neighboring domains. Technical report (2002)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Yang, Y.R., Xie, H., Wang, H., Silberschatz, A., Krishnamurthy, A., Liu, Y., Li, E.L.: On route selection for interdomain traffic engineering. IEEE Network 19(6), 20–27 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • André Berger
    • 1
  • Heiko Röglin
    • 2
  • Ruben van der Zwaan
    • 1
  1. 1.Maastricht UniversityThe Netherlands
  2. 2.University of BonnGermany

Personalised recommendations