Performance Evaluation of Path Cost Improvement in Inter-Layer 3

Networking with ID/Locator Separation Architecture

Graduate School of Engineering,Kansai University, JAPAN

Hiroyuki URABAYASHI Miki YAMAMOTO

System Platforms Research Labs NEC Corporation Tomohiko YAGYU

Conventional Internet

Introduction

Host mobility and multi-homing is not suitably

※D. Farinacci, V. Fuller, D. Meyer, D. Lewis, “Locator/ID Separation Protocol (LISP),"draft-farinacci-lisp-12.txt, Mar 2009.

Causes severe increase of routing table entries in Default Free Zone

ID/Locator separation architecture※ resolves these technical problems

※R. Moskowitz and P. Nikander,“Host Identity Protocol Architecture,"Internet Draft draft-ietf-hip-arch-03, Aug, 2005.

※A. Jonsson, M. Folke, B. Ahlgren,“The split naming/forwarding network architecture,” in Proc. Swedish National Computer Networking Workshop (SNCNW), Sep, 2003.

※J. Abley, M. Bagnulo,“Applicability Statement for the Level 3 Multihoming Shim Protocol (Shim6)," draft-ietf-shim6-applicability-03, Jul, 2007.

ID/Locator Separation Architecture

Split IP address to host ID and Location ID Unique ID(host ID) which is independent of location Mapping system(MS) conversion these addresses

ID/Locator separation architecture

・・・・

Core NW

Local NW

ID Routing

Locator Routing

ID Routing

End host End hostLocal NW

Another benefit of this architecture

Each hosts have unique ID which is independent of NW

Shared node enables

inter-layer 3 networkingNW3

NW2

NW1

Host :A

Host :BDA:B

Shared node

Vertical Link

※B. Ahlgren, J. Arkko et. al. , “A Node Identity Inter-Networking Arcitecture,"IEEE 9th Global Internet Workshop, Apr. 2006.

Hosts operating different layer 3 protocol can communicate

each other (inter-layer 3 networking※)

transfer to a different

network operating

another layer 3 protocol

※S. Schmid, L. Eggert, M. Brunner and J. Quittek,“Towards Autonomous Network Domains," in Proc. 8th IEEE Global Internet Symposium, Mar, 2005.

※J. Crowcroft, S. Hand, R. Mortier, T. Roscoe, A. Warfield,“Plutarch: An Argument for Network Pluralism," in Proc. ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Future Directions in Network Architecture (FDNA), Aug, 2003, pp. 258-266.

※B. Ahlgren, J. Arkko, L. Eggert and J. Rajahalme,“A Node Identity Internetworking Architecture," in Proc. 9th IEEE Global Internet Symposium, Apr, 2006.

Advantages of inter-networking routing

Communications between different

Improvement of robustness Improvement of shortest path

Improve Robustness

Advantages of inter-networking routing

network protocol planes

Efficient shortest path

Aim of the paper

研究目的

Evaluating cost improvement of inter-layer 3 networking

Performance with increase of shared nodes in 3 networks

Strategic assignment of shared node

Aim of the paper

Evaluating method

brought by ID/Locator separation architecture

Incremental deployment scenario of shared nodes

Simulation parameter

NW3

NW2

NW1 ・・

・・

・host

P•Network planes : 3

:•Host 100

Topology

•Shared node 5:

BA(Barabashi-Alber) model

Order of node selection is the same in all 3 networksHeterogeneousNode is randomly and independently selected in all 3 networks

•Multi-homing rate 0.5:

Random(Waxman) model

Homogeneous・・・

・・・

Change of minimum cost with increasing VLs

0 1 2 3 4 54.4

4.8

5.2

5.6

Number of VL

Pat

h C

ost(

hop)

averageoptimal

0 1 2 3 4 53.2

3.4

3.6

3.8

4

Number of VL

Pat

h C

ost(

hop)

averageoptimal

0 1 2 3 4 5

3.7

3.8

3.9

4

4.1

4.2

Number of VL

Pat

h C

ost(

hop)

averageoptimal

（ a ） Random (b)Homogeneous BA (C)Heterogeneous BA

Optimal cost decreased significantly with small number of VL

Strategic VL assignment is very important

Strategic assignment of shared node

Strategic VL assignmentGood performance with small number of VLs

Addition of strategic VL is important

Select outdegree and betweenness of shared nodes as indicators

Betweenness

iP Number of get through nodei

N

：：node number

321 dddd

: outdegree of nodeiid

Outdegree

)1)(2(

NN

PBetweennes i

i

1 2 3 4 50

2

4

6

8

Order of added VL

Out

degr

ee

1 2 3 4 50

15

30

45

Order of added VL

Out

degr

ee

1 2 3 4 50

8

16

24

Order of added VLO

utde

gree

1 2 3 4 50

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

Order of added VL

Bet

wee

nnes

s

1 2 3 4 50

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

Order of added VL

Bet

wee

nnes

s

1 2 3 4 50

0.1

0.2

Order of added VL

Bet

wee

nnes

s

（ a ） Random(b)Homogeneous BA(C)Heterogeneous BA

Outdegree

Betweenness

Outdgree and Betweennes in optical increment

Earlier added VL has higher betweeness and outdegree

Two indexes can be used for strategic assignment

Change of minimum cost with increasing VLs

（ a ） Random (b)Homogeneous BA (C)Heterogeneous BA

0 1 2 3 4 54.4

4.8

5.2

5.6

Number of VL

Pat

h C

ost(

hop) average

optimal

outdegree

betweenness

averageoptimaloutdegreebetweenness

0 1 2 3 4 53.2

3.4

3.6

3.8

4

Number of VL

Pat

h C

ost(

hop)

average

optimal

averageoptimaloutdegreebetweenness

0 1 2 3 4 5

3.7

3.8

3.9

4

4.1

4.2

Number of VL

Pat

h C

ost(

hop)

average

optimal

averageoptimaloutdegreebetweenness

Betweenness and outdegree increment obtains good

Betweenness and outdegree is a good index for

improvement with small number of VL

strategic assignment of shared node

Conclusion

Inter-layer 3 networking enhances routing path

Evaluate improvement of path cost brought by inter-layer 3 networking

Small number of vertical links bring significant performance improvement

Also evaluate strategic assignment of vertical links OutdegreeBetweenness