CS 4700 / CS 5700 Network Fundamentals Lecture 16: IXPs (The Underbelly of the Internet) Revised 3/23/2015.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Routing Basics.
Advertisements

CSE534- Fundamentals of Computer Networking Lecture 12-13: Internet Connectivity + IXPs (The Underbelly of the Internet) Based on slides by D. Choffnes.
© J. Liebeherr, All rights reserved 1 Border Gateway Protocol This lecture is largely based on a BGP tutorial by T. Griffin from AT&T Research.
CSE390 Advanced Computer Networks Lecture 12-13: Internet Connectivity + IXPs (The Underbelly of the Internet) Based on slides by D. Choffnes (NEU), C.
1 Interdomain Routing Protocols. 2 Autonomous Systems An autonomous system (AS) is a region of the Internet that is administered by a single entity and.
TDTS21 Advanced Networking Lecture 6: BGP and Inter-domain Routing (It’s all about the Money) Based on slides from P. Gill, D. Choffnes, J. Rexford, and.
Part II: Inter-domain Routing Policies. March 8, What is routing policy? ISP1 ISP4ISP3 Cust1Cust2 ISP2 traffic Connectivity DOES NOT imply reachability!
James 1:5 If any of you lacks wisdom, he should ask God, who gives generously to all without finding fault, and it will be given to him.
Structure of the Internet Update for 1 st H/Wk We will start lab next week Paper presentation at the end of the session Next Class MPLS.
Analysis of BGP Routing Tables
Measurement in the Internet. Outline Internet topology Bandwidth estimation Tomography Workload characterization Routing dynamics.
Measurement and Monitoring Nick Feamster Georgia Tech.
Measuring ISP topologies with Rocketfuel Ratul Mahajan Neil Spring David Wetherall University of Washington ACM SIGCOMM 2002.
Tradeoffs in CDN Designs for Throughput Oriented Traffic Minlan Yu University of Southern California 1 Joint work with Wenjie Jiang, Haoyuan Li, and Ion.
Internet Inter-Domain Traffic Craig Labovitz, Scott Iekel-Johnson, Danny McPherson, Jon Oberheide, Farnam Jahanian Presented by: Kaushik Choudhary.
Inter-domain Routing Outline Border Gateway Protocol.
Working at a Small-Medium Business or ISP
Scaling IXPs Scalable Infrastructure Workshop. Objectives  To explain scaling options within the IXP  To introduce the Internet Routing Registry at.
Internet Technologies and Applications
Introduction 1-1 Lecture 3 Computer Networking: A Top Down Approach 6 th edition Jim Kurose, Keith Ross Addison-Wesley March 2012 CS3516: These slides.
Network Sensitivity to Hot-Potato Disruptions Renata Teixeira (UC San Diego) with Aman Shaikh (AT&T), Tim Griffin(Intel),
Chapter 4. After completion of this chapter, you should be able to: Explain “what is the Internet? And how we connect to the Internet using an ISP. Explain.
Lecture 8 Page 1 Advanced Network Security Review of Networking Basics: Internet Architecture, Routing, and Naming Advanced Network Security Peter Reiher.
Impact of Prefix Hijacking on Payments of Providers Pradeep Bangera and Sergey Gorinsky Institute IMDEA Networks, Madrid, Spain Developing the Science.
Introduction to BGP.
CS 3700 Networks and Distributed Systems Inter Domain Routing (It’s all about the Money) Revised 8/20/15.
Amogh Dhamdhere (CAIDA) Constantine Dovrolis (Georgia Tech) ITER: A Computational Model to Evaluate Provider and Peer Selection in the Internet Ecosystem.
Introduction to The Internet ISP Workshops 1 Last updated 24 April 2013.
How Secure are Secure Inter- Domain Routing Protocols? SIGCOMM 2010 Presenter: kcir.
Chapter 4, slide: 1 CS 372 – introduction to computer networks* Friday July 23, 2010 Announcements: r Midterms are graded. r Lab 4 is posted. Acknowledgement:
1 GIRO: Geographically Informed Inter-domain Routing Ricardo Oliveira, Mohit Lad, Beichuan Zhang, Lixia Zhang.
Lecture 4: BGP Presentations Lab information H/W update.
Advanced Networking Lab. Given two IP addresses, the estimation algorithm for the path and latency between them is as follows: Step 1: Map IP addresses.
NWEN 402 – Peering & Exchange T With material from Geoff Huston, Andy Linton & Valerie Schaeffer.
TDTS21: Advanced Networking Lecture 7: Internet topology Based on slides from P. Gill and D. Choffnes Revised 2015 by N. Carlsson.
David Wetherall Professor of Computer Science & Engineering Introduction to Computer Networks Hierarchical Routing (§5.2.6)
© Jörg Liebeherr, Organization Addresses TCP/IP Protocol stack Forwarding Internet.
Copyright 2012 Kenneth M. Chipps Ph.D. Cisco CCNA Exploration CCNA 2 Routing Protocols and Concepts BGP Last Update
CS 447 Networks and Data Communication Department of Computer Science Southern Illinois University Edwardsville Fall, 2015 Dr. Hiroshi Fujinoki
SDX: A Software-Defined Internet eXchange Jennifer Rexford Princeton University
Networking Fundamentals. Basics Network – collection of nodes and links that cooperate for communication Nodes – computer systems –Internal (routers,
CS 4396 Computer Networks Lab BGP. Inter-AS routing in the Internet: (BGP)
CSE534- Fundamentals of Computer Networking Lecture 12-13: Internet Connectivity + IXPs (The Underbelly of the Internet) Based on slides by D. Choffnes.
Analysis of peering strategy adoption by transit providers in the Internet Aemen Lodhi (Georgia Tech) Amogh Dhamdhere (CAIDA) Constantine Dovrolis (Georgia.
CSE 592 INTERNET CENSORSHIP (FALL 2015) LECTURE 16 PHILLIPA GILL - STONY BROOK U.
1 The Internet Introductory material. An overview lecture that covers Internet related topics, including a definition of the Internet, an overview of its.
Spring 2010CS 3321 Interdomain Routing. Spring 2010CS 3322 How to Make Routing Scale Flat versus Hierarchical Addresses Inefficient use of Hierarchical.
1 Agenda for Today’s Lecture The rationale for BGP’s design –What is interdomain routing and why do we need it? –Why does BGP look the way it does? How.
© 2005 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. BGP v3.2—6-1 Scaling Service Provider Networks Scaling IGP and BGP in Service Provider Networks.
1 Border Gateway Protocol (BGP) and BGP Security Jeff Gribschaw Sai Thwin ECE 4112 Final Project April 28, 2005.
Spring 2006CS 3321 Interdomain Routing. Spring 2006CS 3322 How to Make Routing Scale Flat versus Hierarchical Addresses Inefficient use of Hierarchical.
Benefits and Value of an IXP The IXP Value Proposition.
Inter-domain Routing Outline Border Gateway Protocol.
COMPUTER NETWORKS Hwajung Lee. Image Source:
The Benefit and Need of Standard Contribution for IXPs Jan Stumpf System Engineer.
1 CS716 Advanced Computer Networks By Dr. Amir Qayyum.
Internet Strucure Internet structure: network of networks Question: given millions of access ISPs, how to connect them together? access.
Computer Networks Dr. Adil Yousif CS Lecture 1.
ROUTING.
CS 3700 Networks and Distributed Systems
CS 3700 Networks and Distributed Systems
Keeping local stuff local
Border Gateway Protocol
CS 4700 / CS 5700 Network Fundamentals
No Direction Home: The True cost of Routing Around Decoys
CS 457 – Lecture 10 Internetworking and IP
Amogh Dhamdhere (CAIDA/UCSD) Constantine Dovrolis (Georgia Tech)
Internet Interconnection
Inter-domain Routing Outline Homework #3 solutions
SwiNOG May 2013 Ian Cleary – Director Internet Services EMEA
Presentation transcript:

CS 4700 / CS 5700 Network Fundamentals Lecture 16: IXPs (The Underbelly of the Internet) Revised 3/23/2015

 Emerging Internet Trends  Internet Exchange Points (IXPs) Outline 2

The Internet as a Natural System 3  You’ve learned about the TCP/IP Internet  Simple abstraction: Unreliable datagram transmission  Various layers  Ancillary services (DNS)  Extra in-network support  So what does the Internet look like?

What does the Internet look like? 4

5

Characterization challenges 6  Limited measurements and models can hint at it  Traceroute does not give us a complete view  Gao-Rexford (policy routing) doesn’t capture everything  What is the Internet actually being used for?  Emergent properties impossible to predict from protocols  Requires measuring the network  Constant evolution makes it a moving target

How is the Internet used? 7

8

Measuring the capital-I Internet* 9  Measuring the Internet is hard  Significant previous work on  Router and AS-level topologies  Individual link / ISP traffic studies  Synthetic traffic demands  But limited “ground-truth” on inter-domain traffic  Most commercial arrangements under NDA  Significant lack of uniform instrumentation *Mainly borrowed stolen from Labovitz 2010

Conventional Wisdom (i.e., lies) 10  Internet is a global scale end-to-end network  Packets transit (mostly) unmolested  Value of network is global addressability /reachability  Broad distribution of traffic sources / sinks  An Internet “core” exists  Dominated by a dozen global transit providers (tier 1)  Interconnecting content, consumer and regional providers

Traditional view 11

Does this still hold? 12  Emergence of ‘hyper giant’ services  How much traffic do these services contribute?  Hard to answer!  Reading: Labovitz 2010 tries to look at this.

How do we validate/improve this picture? 13  Measure from  110+ ISPs / content providers  Including 3,000 edge routers and 100,000 interfaces  And an estimated ~25% all inter-domain traffic  Do some other validation  Extrapolate estimates with fit from ground-truth data  Talk with operators

Where is traffic going? 14  Increasingly: Google and Comcast  Tier 1 still has large fraction, but large portion of it is to Google!  Why?  Consolidation of traffic  Fewer ASes responsible for more of the traffic

Why is this happening? 15

Transit is dead! Long live the eyeball! 16  Commoditization of IP and Hosting / CDN  Drop of price of wholesale transit  Drop of price of video / CDN  Economics and scale drive enterprise to “cloud”  Consolidation  Bigger get bigger (economies of scale)  e.g., Google, Yahoo, MSFT acquisitions  Success of bundling / Higher Value Services – Triple and quad play, etc.  New economic models  Paid content (ESPN 3), paid peering, etc.  Difficult to quantify due to NDA / commercial privacy  Disintermediation  Direct interconnection of content and consumer  Driven by both cost and increasingly performance

New applications + ways to access them 17

The shift from hierarchy to flat Local Access Provider Local Access Provider Regional Access Provider Regional Access Provider AT&T Sprint Verizon Regional Access Provider Regional Access Provider Tier 1 ISPs (settlement free peering) Tier 2 ISPs Tier 3 ISPs Local Access Provider Local Access Provider Businesses/consumers $ $ $ $ $ $ $$$$

The shift from hierarchy to flat Local Access Provider Local Access Provider Regional Access Provider Regional Access Provider AT&T Sprint Verizon Regional Access Provider Regional Access Provider Tier 1 ISPs (settlement free peering) Tier 2 ISPs Tier 3 ISPs Local Access Provider Local Access Provider Businesses/consumers $ IXP$ $

A more accurate model? 20

How do ASes connect? 21  Point of Presence (PoP)  Usually a room or a building (windowless)  One router from one AS is physically connected to the other  Often in big cities  Establishing a new connection at PoPs can be expensive  Internet eXchange Points (IXP)  Facilities dedicated to providing presence and connectivity for large numbers of ASes  Many fewer IXPs than PoPs  Economies of scale

IXPs Definition 22  Industry definition (according to Euro-IX) A physical network infrastructure operated by a single entity with the purpose to facilitate the exchange of Internet traffic between Autonomous Systems The number of Autonomous Systems connected should be at least three and there must be a clear and open policy for others to join.

IXPs worldwide 23

Inside an IXP 24  Connection fabric  Can provide illusion of all-to-all connectivity  Lots of routers and cables  Also a route server  Collects and distributes routes from participants

Structure 25 IXPs offer connectivity to ASes enable peering

Inside an IXP 26

IXPs – Publicly available information 27

How much traffic is at IXPs?* 28  We don’t know for sure!  Seems to be a lot, though.  One estimate: 43% of exchanged bytes are not visible to us  Also 70% of peerings are invisible *Mainly borrowed stolen from Feldmann 2012

Revised model

Exercise answers 30  EDNS  Client identifier can be embedded in query IP address Location Prefix …  CDN now knows more about where a client is located, instead of just knowing where its LDNS server is

Exercise answers (2) 31  Peering at an IXP  Good Closer to other ISPs (performance) Lower cost to other ISPs (peering)  Bad How much does it cost to get there? How much does it cost to stay there? What if I’m a tier 1? 

Exercise answers (3) 32  Remote peering  How is this different than BGP? First of all: the good is that you don’t have to be physically present at the IXP! BGP: You forward your announcement to your provider, it decides how to announce it from there BGP only cares about the next hop Can’t establish settlement-free link over a 2-hop path Remote peering: You have direct control over how your announcements are forwarded to other IXP participants