hitesh ballani paul francis, tuan cao and jia wang cornell ...€¦ · motivation: rapid routing...
TRANSCRIPT
-
ViAggre: Making Routers Last Longer!
Hitesh Ballani
Paul Francis, Tuan Cao and Jia WangCornell University and AT&T Labs – Research
HotNets 2008
-
Motivation: Rapid Routing Table Growth
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
0806040200989694929088
Act
ive
BG
P e
ntrie
s (F
IB S
ize)
Year
282,000 prefixes (Sep’08)
0
50000
100000
150000
200000
250000
300000
0806040200989694929088
Act
ive
BG
P e
ntrie
s (F
IB S
ize)
Year
282,000 prefixes (Sep’08)
-
Motivation: Rapid Routing Table Growth
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
140806040200989694929088
Act
ive
BG
P e
ntrie
s (F
IB S
ize)
Year
0
100000
200000
300000
400000
500000
140806040200989694929088
Act
ive
BG
P e
ntrie
s (F
IB S
ize)
Year
??Rapid future growth
I IPv4 exhaustionI IPv6 deployment
-
Typical Router Innards
Route Processor
CPU RIB
Line Card
ASIC FIB
Line Card
Line Card
Line Card
-
Typical Router Innards
Route Processor
CPU RIB
Line Card
ASIC FIB
Line Card
Line Card
Line Card
Routing Information Base
(DRAM $)
-
Typical Router Innards
Route Processor
CPU RIB
Line Card
ASIC FIB
Line Card
Line Card
Line Card
Forwarding Information Base
(SRAM $$$)
-
Does (FIB) Size Matter?
Technical concerns
I More Memory
I More ProcessingI Power and Heat dissipation problems
-
Does (FIB) Size Matter?
Technical concerns
I More Memory
I More ProcessingI Power and Heat dissipation problems
Business concerns
I Less cost-effective networksI Price per byte forwarded increases
I Router memory upgrades
-
Does (FIB) Size Matter?
Technical concerns
I More Memory
I More ProcessingI Power and Heat dissipation problems
Business concerns
I Less cost-effective networksI Price per byte forwarded increases
I Router memory upgrades
ISPs are willing to undergo some pain to reduce FIBsize
-
Routing Scalability Problem Space
[Deering, ’96]
[O’Dell, ID’97]
[Zhang et. al., ICNP’06]
[Farinacci, ID’07]
[Massey et. al., ID’07]
[Jen et. al., HotNets’08]
[Francis, CNIS’94]
[Deering et. al., ID’00]
[Hain, ID’02]
[Krioukov et. al., Arxiv’05]
FIB growthRIB growth
Routing Convergence,Update Churn, ....
-
Routing Scalability Problem Space
[Deering, ’96]
[O’Dell, ID’97]
[Zhang et. al., ICNP’06]
[Farinacci, ID’07]
[Massey et. al., ID’07]
[Jen et. al., HotNets’08]
[Francis, CNIS’94]
[Deering et. al., ID’00]
[Hain, ID’02]
[Krioukov et. al., Arxiv’05]
Separate edge from the core
FIB growthRIB growth
Routing Convergence,Update Churn, ....
-
Routing Scalability Problem Space
[Deering, ’96]
[O’Dell, ID’97]
[Zhang et. al., ICNP’06]
[Farinacci, ID’07]
[Massey et. al., ID’07]
[Jen et. al., HotNets’08]
[Francis, CNIS’94]
[Deering et. al., ID’00]
[Hain, ID’02]
[Krioukov et. al., Arxiv’05]
Geographical routing
FIB growthRIB growth
Routing Convergence,Update Churn, ....
-
Routing Scalability Problem Space
[Deering, ’96]
[O’Dell, ID’97]
[Zhang et. al., ICNP’06]
[Farinacci, ID’07]
[Massey et. al., ID’07]
[Jen et. al., HotNets’08]
[Francis, CNIS’94]
[Deering et. al., ID’00]
[Hain, ID’02]
[Krioukov et. al., Arxiv’05]
Compact routing
FIB growthRIB growth
Routing Convergence,Update Churn, ....
-
Routing Scalability Problem Space
[Deering, ’96]
[O’Dell, ID’97]
[Zhang et. al., ICNP’06]
[Farinacci, ID’07]
[Massey et. al., ID’07]
[Jen et. al., HotNets’08]
[Francis, CNIS’94]
[Deering et. al., ID’00]
[Hain, ID’02]
[Krioukov et. al., Arxiv’05]
All require architectural changeSo many ideas, so little impact!
FIB growthRIB growth
Routing Convergence,Update Churn, ....
-
Routing Scalability Problem Space
[Deering, ’96]
[O’Dell, ID’97]
[Zhang et. al., ICNP’06]
[Farinacci, ID’07]
[Massey et. al., ID’07]
[Jen et. al., HotNets’08]
[Francis, CNIS’94]
[Deering et. al., ID’00]
[Hain, ID’02]
[Krioukov et. al., Arxiv’05]
Tackle routing scalability through a series ofincremental, individually cost-effective upgrades
FIB growthRIB growth
Routing Convergence,Update Churn, ....
-
Routing Scalability Problem Space
[Deering, ’96]
[O’Dell, ID’97]
[Zhang et. al., ICNP’06]
[Farinacci, ID’07]
[Massey et. al., ID’07]
[Jen et. al., HotNets’08]
[Francis, CNIS’94]
[Deering et. al., ID’00]
[Hain, ID’02]
[Krioukov et. al., Arxiv’05]
This Paper: Focuses on reducing FIB size
FIB growthRIB growth
Routing Convergence,Update Churn, ....
-
Virtual Aggregation, aka ViAggre
A “configuration-only” approach to shrinking routerFIBs
I Applies to legacy routersI Can be adopted independently by any ISP
Key Insight: Divide the routing burden
A router only needs to keep routes for a fraction ofthe address space
-
Talk Outline
I Introduction[]y
I ViAggre: Basic Idea[]y
I ViAggre Design[]y
I Evaluation[]y
I Deployment[]y
I Conclusions
-
ViAggre: Basic Idea
PoP A PoP C
PoP B
ISP
IPv4AddressSpace
0.0.0.0
255.255.255.255
External Router External Router
Today: All routers have routes to all destinations
-
ViAggre: Basic Idea
PoP A PoP C
PoP B
ISP
0.0.0.0
255.255.255.255
External Router External Router
0/2
64/2
128/2
192/2
VirtualPrefixes
Divide address space into Virtual Prefixes (VPs)
-
ViAggre: Basic Idea0.0.0.0
255.255.255.255
External Router External Router
0/2
64/2
128/2
192/2
VirtualPrefixes
Aggregation Pointsfor Green VP
Assign Virtual Prefixes to the routersRouters only have routes to a fraction of the address
space
-
ViAggre: Basic Idea0.0.0.0
255.255.255.255
External Router External Router
0/2
64/2
128/2
192/2
VirtualPrefixes
Aggregation Pointsfor Green VP
How to achieve such division of the routing table?Without changes to routers and routing protocols
Without cooperation from external networks
-
Talk Outline
I Introduction[]y
I ViAggre: Basic Idea[]y
I ViAggre Design[]y
I Evaluation[]y
I Deployment[]y
I Conclusions
-
ViAggre Control-Plane0.0.0.0
255.255.255.255
External Router External Router
0/2
64/2
128/2
192/2 Full Routing Table
eBGP Peers may advertise full routing table
-
ViAggre Control-Plane0.0.0.0
255.255.255.255
External Router External Router
0/2
64/2
128/2
192/2 Full Routing Table
Load full routing table into RIB
Supress all but blue routes from FIB
FIB SuppressionBlue routers only load blue routes into their FIB
-
Data-Plane paths0.0.0.0
255.255.255.255
External Router External Router
0/2
64/2
128/2
192/2 Virtual Prefix
Packets destined to a prefix in Red
Consider packets destined to a prefix in the red VP
-
Data-Plane paths0.0.0.0
255.255.255.255
External Router External Router
0/2
64/2
128/2
192/2 I
A
E X
A2
12
ViAggre pathIngress (I) → Aggregation Pt (A) → Egress (E)
-
Ingress → Aggregation Point0.0.0.0
255.255.255.255
External Router External Router
0/2
64/2
128/2
192/2 I
A
E X
A2
1
Router I doesn’t have a route for destination prefix
-
Ingress → Aggregation Point0.0.0.0
255.255.255.255
External Router External Router
0/2
64/2
128/2
192/2 I
A
E X
A2
1
Advertise Red VP
Aggregation Points advertise corresponding VirtualPrefixes
-
Ingress → Aggregation Point0.0.0.0
255.255.255.255
External Router External Router
0/2
64/2
128/2
192/2 I
A
E X
A2
1
Advertise Red VP
Prefix Next-HopP1P2
........
0/2 A128/2192/2 ....
....
Blue router has a route for the red Virtual Prefix
-
Aggregation Point → Egress0.0.0.0
255.255.255.255
External Router External Router
0/2
64/2
128/2
192/2 I
A
E X
A2 2
Prefix Next-HopP3P4
X....
64/2 ....
128/2 192/2 ....
....
Aggregation Pt. A tunnels packet to external router
-
Aggregation Point → Egress0.0.0.0
255.255.255.255
External Router External Router
0/2
64/2
128/2
192/2 I
A
E X
A2
1
Strip tunnel headerfrom outgoing pkts
Egress Router strips the tunnel header off outgoingpackets
-
Failure of Aggregation Point0.0.0.0
255.255.255.255
External Router External Router
0/2
64/2
128/2
192/2 I
A
E X
A2
1
What if Aggregation Pt. A fails?
-
Failure of Aggregation Point0.0.0.0
255.255.255.255
External Router External Router
0/2
64/2
128/2
192/2 I
A
E X
A2
Prefix Next-HopP1P2
........
0/2 A2128/2192/2 ....
....
Router I installs the route advertised by A2
-
Failure of Aggregation Point0.0.0.0
255.255.255.255
External Router External Router
0/2
64/2
128/2
192/2 I
A
E X
A2
Prefix Next-HopP1P2
........
0/2 A2128/2192/2 ....
....
Packets are re-routed appropriately
-
ViAggre’s impact on ISP’s traffic0.0.0.0
255.255.255.255
External Router External Router
0/2
64/2
128/2
192/2 I
A
E X
A2
1
ViAggre paths can be longer than native pathsTraffic stretch, increased router and link load, etc.
-
Popular Prefixes
Traffic volume follows power-law distribution
I 95% of the traffic goes to 5% of prefixesI Has held up for years
Install “Popular Prefixes” in routers
I Stable over weeksI Mitigates ViAggre’s impact on the ISP’s traffic
-
Talk Outline
I Introduction[]y
I ViAggre: Basic Idea[]y
I ViAggre Design[]y
I Evaluation[]y
I Deployment[]y
I Conclusions
-
Stretch Vs FIB Size
Assigning more routers to aggregate a virtual prefix
I Reduces Stretch imposed on TrafficI Increases FIB size
Aggregation Point Assignment Problem
I Minimize Worst FIB size, subject to constrainton Worst stretch
I NP-complete problemI Implemented a greedy approximation
-
Performance Study
Data from tier-1 ISP
I Topology, Routing tables, Traffic matrix
Used out algorithm with varying stretch constraints
-
Constraining Worst Stretch
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 2 4 6 8 10 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7F
IB S
ize
(%
of D
FZ
rou
ting
tabl
e)
Str
etch
(m
sec)
Worst-case Stretch Constraint (msec)
Worst-case FIB Size
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 2 4 6 8 10 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7F
IB S
ize
(%
of D
FZ
rou
ting
tabl
e)
Str
etch
(m
sec)
Worst-case Stretch Constraint (msec)
Worst-case FIB Size
FIB Size reduces as Stretch constraint is relaxedWorst-case Stretch ≤ 4ms ⇒ Worst FIB = 10,226 prefixes
(4% of global routing table)
-
Constraining Worst Stretch
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 2 4 6 8 10 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7F
IB S
ize
(%
of D
FZ
rou
ting
tabl
e)
Str
etch
(m
sec)
Worst-case Stretch Constraint (msec)
Worst-case FIB SizeWorst Stretch
Average Stretch
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 2 4 6 8 10 0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7F
IB S
ize
(%
of D
FZ
rou
ting
tabl
e)
Str
etch
(m
sec)
Worst-case Stretch Constraint (msec)
Worst-case FIB SizeWorst Stretch
Average Stretch
Average Stretch is negligibleWorst-case Stretch ≤ 4ms ⇒ Average Stretch = 0.2msec
-
Router Load
Deployment with Worst-case Stretch ≤ 4msec
I Shrinks FIB by more than 20xI Median router load increases by 31.3%
Using popular prefixes
I 5% popular prefixes carry 96.7% of trafficI Median and Worst-case router load increase ≈
1%
-
Talk Outline
I Introduction[]y
I ViAggre: Basic Idea[]y
I ViAggre Design[]y
I Evaluation[]y
I Deployment[]y
I Conclusions[]y
-
ViAggre Pros
I Shrinks router FIB substantially
I Can be incrementally deployed
I Can be deployed on a limited-scale
I Incentive for deploymentI No change to ISP’s routing setup
I Does not affect convergence timesI Does not affect routes advertised to
neighborsI Does not restrict routing policiesI
. . .
-
Can it be deployed?
Configuration overhead of a configuration-onlysolution
I Configuring FIB suppression on routersI Configuring LSP advertisements on edge routers
Planning Overhead
I Choosing virtual prefixes
I Assigning aggregation points
I Assuring network robustnessI
. . .
-
ViAggre management overhead
Deployed ViAggre on WAIL
I Cisco 7300 routersI Developed Configuration Tool
I ∼330 line python scriptI Extracts information from existing configuration filesI Generates ViAggre configuration files
I Planning tool in the works
Working with a router vendor (Huawei)
I Implement ViAggre nativelyI IETF Draft
-
Conclusion
ViAggre shrinks the FIB on routers
I Can extend the lifetime of installed routers
Is this a “complete” solution? No
I A simple and effective first stepI Next Step: Inter-domain ViAggre
-
Thank You!
IntroductionDesignEvaluationDeployment