Multipath Routing Slice Experiments in Federated Testbeds

  • Tanja Zseby
  • Thomas Zinner
  • Kurt Tutschku
  • Yuval Shavitt
  • Phuoc Tran-Gia
  • Christian Schwartz
  • Albert Rafetseder
  • Christian Henke
  • Carsten Schmoll
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6656)


The Internet today consist of many heterogeneous infrastructures, owned and maintained by separate and potentially competing administrative authorities. On top of this a wide variety of applications has different requirements with regard to quality, reliability and security from the underlying networks. The number of stakeholders who participate in provisioning of network and services is growing. More demanding applications (like eGovernment, eHealth, critical and emergency infrastructures) are on the rise. Therefore we assume that these two basic characteristics, a) multiple authorities and b) applications with very diverse demands, are likely to stay or even increase in the Internet of the future. In such an environment federation and virtualization of resources are key features that should be supported in a future Internet. The ability to form slices across domains that meet application specific requirements enables many of the desired features in future networks.

In this paper, we present a Multipath Routing Slice experiment that we performed over multiple federated testbeds. We combined capabilities from different experimental facilities, since one single testbed did not offer all the required capabilities. This paper summarizes the conducted experiment, our experience with the usability of federated testbeds and our experience with the use of advanced measurement technologies within experimental facilities. We believe that this experiment provides a good example use case for the future Internet itself because we assume that the Internet will consist of multiple different infrastructures that have to be combined in application specific overlays or routing slices, very much like the experimental facilities we used in this experiment. We also assume that the growing demands will push towards a much better measurement instrumentation of the future Internet. The tools used in our experiment can provide a starting point for this.


Experimental Facility Path Delay Clock Synchronization Delay Measurement Stream Control Transmission Protocol 
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.


  1. 1.
    FIRE - Future Internet Research & Experimentation (2010), Information available at
  2. 2.
    Free T-REX: Free Tools for Future Internet Tools and Experimentation (2010), Information available at
  3. 3.
    Onelab - Future Internet Testbeds (2010), Information available at
  4. 4.
    VINI - A Virtual Network Infrastructure (2010), Information available at
  5. 5.
    Anderson, T., Peterson, L., Shenker, S., Turner, J.: Overcoming the internet impasse through virtualization. IEEE Computer, 34–41 (April 2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Anerousis, N., Hjlmtysson, G.: Service level routing on the Internet. In: IEEE GLOBECOM’99, vol. 1, pp. 553–559 (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Becke, M., Dreibholz, T., Yyengar, J., Natarajan, P., Tuexen, M.: Load Sharing for the Stream Control Transmission Protocol (SCTP), Internet-Draft (2010),
  8. 8.
    Boschi, E., Denazis, S., Zseby, T.: A measurement framework for inter-domain sla validation. Comput. Commun. 29, 703–716 (2006), doi:10.1016/j.comcom.2005.07.026CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bourgeau, T., Augé, J., Friedman, T.: TopHat: supporting experiments through measurement infrastructure federation. In: Proceedings of the International Conference on Testbeds and Research Infrastructures for the Development of Networks and Communities, TridentCom (2010)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    GENI Consortium. GENI - Global Environment for Network Innovations (2006), Information available at
  11. 11.
    Kornblum, J., Raz, D., Shavitt, Y.: The active process interaction with its environment. Computer Networks 36(1), 21–34 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    MoMe. Cluster of European Projects aimed at Monitoring and Measurement (2010), Information available at
  13. 13.
    Nakao, A., Peterson, L., Bavier, A.: A Routing Underlay for Overlay Networks. In: Proc. of the ACM Sigcomm 2003 Conference, Karlsruhe, Germany (Aug. 2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yoshifumi Nishida and Philip Eardley. Charter of the Multipath TCP Work Group (MPTCP) (Mar 2010), Information available at
  15. 15.
    Larry Peterson, Soner Sevinc, Jay Lepreau, Robert Ricci, John Wroclawski, Ted Gaber, and Stephen Schwab. Slice-Based Facility Architecture (2009), Information available at
  16. 16.
    Psounis, K.: Active Networks: Applications, Security, Safety, and Architectures. IEEE Communications Surveys 2(1) (1999),
  17. 17.
    Scott Rixner. Network virtualization: Breaking the performance barrier. ACM Queue, (Jan./Feb. 2008)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Santos, T., Henke, C., Schmoll, C., Zseby., T.: Multi-Hop Packet Tracking for Experimental Facilities. In: Demo Sigcomm 2010, New Delhi, India (Aug. 2010)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shavitt, Y., Shir, E.: DIMES: Let the internet measure itself. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 35(5), 71–74 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Phuoc Tran-Gia. G-Lab: A Future Generation Internet Research Platform (2008), Information available at
  21. 21.
    Trilogy. Trilogy: Architecting the Future Internet (2010), Information available at
  22. 22.
    Wischik, D., Handley, M., Braun, M.B.: The Resource Pooling Principle. SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 38, 47–52 (2008), doi:10.1145/1452335.1452342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zinner, T., Tutschku, K., Nakao, A., Tran-Gia, P.: Re-sequencing Buffer Occupancy of a Concurrent Multipath Transmission Mechanism for Transport System Virtualization. In: Proc. of the 16. KiVS 2009, Kassel, Germany (Mar. 2009)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Zinner, T., Tutschku, K., Nakao, A., Tran-Gia, P.: Using Concurrent Multipath Transmission for Transport Virtualization: Analyzing Path Selection. In: Proceedings of the 22nd International Teletraffic Congress (ITC), Amsterdam, Netherlands (Sep. 2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2011

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 2.5 International License (, which permits any noncommercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the chapter's Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.

Authors and Affiliations

  • Tanja Zseby
    • 1
  • Thomas Zinner
    • 2
  • Kurt Tutschku
    • 3
  • Yuval Shavitt
    • 4
  • Phuoc Tran-Gia
    • 2
  • Christian Schwartz
    • 2
  • Albert Rafetseder
    • 3
  • Christian Henke
    • 5
  • Carsten Schmoll
    • 1
  1. 1.FOKUS - Fraunhofer Institute for Open Communication SystemsBerlinGermany
  2. 2.Institute of Computer ScienceUniversity of WuerzburgWuerzburgGermany
  3. 3.Professur “Future Communication” (endowed by Telekom Austria)University of ViennaAustria
  4. 4.School of Electrical EngineeringTel Aviv UniversityTel AvivIsrael
  5. 5.Chair for Next Generation NetworksTechnical University BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations