Collection and Analysis of data for Inter-domain Traffic Engineering

• Juan Camilo Cardona IMDEA Networks Institute
• Pierre Francois Cisco Systems
• Paolo Lucente Cisco Systems

Resumo

Inter-domain IP traffic engineering requires the collection and analysis of data that is distributed among multiple network platforms. This process is usually considered complex for network operators and limits the efficiency that traffic management methods can achieve. The introduction of Software Define Networks may change this rigid context, as it is pushing operators to request flexible routing system architectures. In the future, the network operation team might have the resources to obtain, maintain, and analyze a rich variety of data from within and outside their networks. Without the need to change many of their routing devices, such data can be leveraged to implement more complex inter-domain TE applications. In this paper, we review the process of data collection and management required to benefit from such techniques. Additionally, we describe various enhanced TE applications, providing details of one of them in a case study.

Referências

Agrawal, D., Das, S., and El Abbadi, A. (2011). Big data and cloud computing: current state and future opportunities. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Extending Database Technology, pages 530–533. ACM.

Awduche, D., Chiu, A., Elwalid, A., Widjaja, I., and Xiao, X. (2002). Overview and principles of internet trafc engineering.

Baker, F. (1995). Requirements for ip version 4 routers. IETF RFC 1812.

Bjorklund, M. (2010). Yang-a data modeling language for the network conguration protocol (netconf). RFC 6020.

Cardona, J. C., Francois, P., and Lucente, P. (2014). Making bgp ltering a habit: Impact on policies. draft-ietf-grow-ltering-threats-02. Work in Progress. IETF Draft.

Cardona, J. C., Francois, P., Ray, S., Patel, K., Lucente, P., and Mohapatra, P. (2013). Bgp path marking. draft-bgp-path-marking-00. Work in Progress. IETF Draft.

Casado, M., Koponen, T., Shenker, S., and Tootoonchian, A. (2012). Fabric: a retrospective on evolving sdn. In Proceedings of the rst workshop on Hot topics in software dened networks, pages 85–90. ACM.

Claise, B. (2004). Cisco systems netow services export version 9. IETF RFC 3954.

Donnet, B. and Bonaventure, O. (2008). On bgp communities. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 38(2):55–59.

Dufeld, N., Gopalan, K., Hines, M. R., Shaikh, A., and Van Der Merwe, J. E. (2007). Measurement informed route selection. Passive and Active Network Measurement, pages 250–254.

Feamster, N., Borkenhagen, J., and Rexford, J. (2003). Guidelines for interdomain trafc engineering. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, 33(5):19–30.

Francois, P., Cardona, J. C.and Simpson, A., and Haas, J. (2014). Add-path for route servers. draft-francois-idr-rs-addpaths-00. Work in Progress. IETF Draft.

Hares, S. and White, R. (2013). Software-dened networks and the interface to the routing system (i2rs). IEEE Internet Computing, 17(4).

Jasinska, E., Hilliard, N., Raszuk, R., and Bakker, N. (2014). Internet exchange route server. draft-ietf-idr-ix-bgp-route-server-04. Work in Progress. IETF Draft.

Kiese, M., Marcheva, V., Eberspacher, J., and Schupke, D. (2009). Diverse routing based In Design of Reliable Communication Networks, 2009. on shared risk link groups. DRCN 2009. 7th International Workshop on, pages 153–159. IEEE.

Lucente, P. (2011). Detecting routing violations. http://wiki.pmacct.net/DetectingRoutingViolations.

Lucente, P. and Jasinska, E. (2014). Netflow and bgp multi-path: quo vadis? https://www.nanog.org/sites/default/files/monday_general_lucente_netflow_32.pdf.

Luckie, M., Huffaker, B., Dhamdhere, A., Giotsas, V., et al. (2013). As relationships, In Proceedings of the 2013 conference on Internet customer cones, and validation. measurement conference, pages 243–256. ACM.

Lutu, A., Bagnulo, M., Cid-Sueiro, J., and Maennel, O. (2014). Separating wheat from chaff: Winnowing unintended prexes using machine learning. Proceedings of 33rd IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications, IEEE INFOCOM.

Marques, P., Fernando, R., Mohapatra, P., Gredler, H., and Chen, E. (2012). Advertisement of the best external route in bgp. draft-ietf-idr-best-external-05. Work in Progress. IETF Draft.

Meyer, D. et al. (2005). University of oregon route views project.

Raszuk, R., Fernando, R., Patel, K., McPherson, D., and Kumaki, K. (2012). Distribution of diverse bgp paths. IETF RFC 6774.

Rekhter, Y., Li, T., and Hares, S. (2006). Border gateway protocol 4. IETF RFC 4271.

RIPE (2013). Ripe ncc ris.

Savage, S., Collins, A., Hoffman, E., Snell, J., and Anderson, T. (1999). The end-toend effects of internet path selection. In ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, volume 29, pages 289–299. ACM.

Scudder, J., Fernando, R., and Stuart, S. (2012). Bgp monitoring protocol. draft-ietfgrow-bmp-07. Work in Progress. IETF Draft.

Sebos, P., Yates, J., Hjalmtysson, G., and Greenberg, A. (2001). Auto-discovery of shared risk link groups. Optical Fiber Communication Conference, 4.

Stallings, W. (1998). SNMP, SNMPv2, SNMPv3, and RMON 1 and 2. Addison-Wesley Longman Publishing Co., Inc.

Walton, D., Retana, A., Scudder, J., and Chen, E. (2012). Advertisement of multiple paths in bgp. draft-ietf-idr-add-paths-08. Work in Progress. IETF Draft.

White, R. and Retana, A. (2013). Filtering of overlapping routes. draft-white-growoverlapping-routes-02. Work in Progress. IETF Draft.