Achieving good end-to-end service using Bill-Pay Cristian Estan, Aditya Akella, Suman Banerjee Univ. of Wisconsin - Madison.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Data-Plane Accountability with In-Band Path Diagnosis Murtaza Motiwala, Nick Feamster Georgia Tech Andy Bavier Princeton University.
Advertisements

Multihoming and Multi-path Routing
Congestion Control and Fairness Models Nick Feamster CS 4251 Computer Networking II Spring 2008.
Multihoming and Multi-path Routing
P4P: ISPs and P2P Laird Popkin, Pando Networks Doug Pasko, Verizon.
Multihoming and Multi-path Routing CS 7260 Nick Feamster January
Logically Centralized Control Class 2. Types of Networks ISP Networks – Entity only owns the switches – Throughput: 100GB-10TB – Heterogeneous devices:
Ningning HuCarnegie Mellon University1 Optimizing Network Performance In Replicated Hosting Peter Steenkiste (CMU) with Ningning Hu (CMU), Oliver Spatscheck.
TELE202 Lecture 8 Congestion control 1 Lecturer Dr Z. Huang Overview ¥Last Lecture »X.25 »Source: chapter 10 ¥This Lecture »Congestion control »Source:
Review: Routing algorithms Distance Vector algorithm. –What information is maintained in each router? –How to distribute the global network information?
1 Traffic Engineering (TE). 2 Network Congestion Causes of congestion –Lack of network resources –Uneven distribution of traffic caused by current dynamic.
Dynamic Routing Scalable Infrastructure Workshop, AfNOG2008.
Lecture 6 Overlay Networks CPE 401/601 Computer Network Systems slides are modified from Jennifer Rexford.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Module 4: Implement the DiffServ QoS Model Lesson 4.10: Deploying End-to-End QoS.
© 2006 Cisco Systems, Inc. All rights reserved. Optimizing Converged Cisco Networks (ONT) Module 4: Implement the DiffServ QoS Model.
Advanced Topics of WAN Compiled from Previous ISQS 6341 Project November 2003.
CPSC Topics in Multimedia Networking A Mechanism for Equitable Bandwidth Allocation under QoS and Budget Constraints D. Sivakumar IBM Almaden Research.
15-441: Computer Networking Lecture 26: Networking Future.
High Performance All-Optical Networks with Small Buffers Yashar Ganjali High Performance Networking Group Stanford University
Traffic Engineering Jennifer Rexford Advanced Computer Networks Tuesdays/Thursdays 1:30pm-2:50pm.
Computer Networks Fall, 2007 Prof Peterson. CIS 235: Networks Fall, 2007 Western State College  What is “store and forward”?  What is a buffer / queue?
Multiple constraints QoS Routing Given: - a (real time) connection request with specified QoS requirements (e.g., Bdw, Delay, Jitter, packet loss, path.
Special Session PDCS’2000 Interworking of Diffserv, RSVP and MPLS for achieving QoS in the Internet Junaid Ahmed Zubairi Department of Mathematics and.
IPv6 and Overlays EE122 Introduction to Communication Networks Discussion Section.
New Routing Architectures Jennifer Rexford Advanced Computer Networks Tuesdays/Thursdays 1:30pm-2:50pm.
UCB Implementing QoS Jean Walrand EECS. UCB Outline What? Bandwidth, Delay Where? End-to-End, Edge-to-Edge, Edge-to-End, Overlay Mechanisms Access Control.
On Multi-Path Routing Aditya Akella 03/25/02. What is Multi-Path Routing?  Dynamically route traffic Multiple paths to a destination Path taken dependant.
CS 268: Future Internet Architectures Ion Stoica May 6, 2003.
Using Prices to Allocate Resources at Access Points Jimmy Shih, Randy Katz, Anthony Joseph One Administrative Domain Access Point A Access Point B Network.
Multipath Routing Jennifer Rexford Advanced Computer Networks Tuesdays/Thursdays 1:30pm-2:50pm.
The Future of the Internet Jennifer Rexford ’91 Computer Science Department Princeton University
Building a Strong Foundation for a Future Internet Jennifer Rexford ’91 Computer Science Department (and Electrical Engineering and the Center for IT Policy)
Jennifer Rexford Princeton University MW 11:00am-12:20pm Wide-Area Traffic Management COS 597E: Software Defined Networking.
Tradeoffs in CDN Designs for Throughput Oriented Traffic Minlan Yu University of Southern California 1 Joint work with Wenjie Jiang, Haoyuan Li, and Ion.
Routing of Outgoing Packets with MP-TCP draft-handley-mptcp-routing-00 Mark Handley Costin Raiciu Marcelo Bagnulo.
Game-based Analysis of Denial-of- Service Prevention Protocols Ajay Mahimkar Class Project: CS 395T.
CSE679: Multicast and Multimedia r Basics r Addressing r Routing r Hierarchical multicast r QoS multicast.
Jennifer Rexford Fall 2010 (TTh 1:30-2:50 in COS 302) COS 561: Advanced Computer Networks Stub.
NET-REPLAY: A NEW NETWORK PRIMITIVE Ashok Anand Aditya Akella University of Wisconsin, Madison.
Lawrence G. Roberts CEO Anagran September 2005 Enabling Data-Intensive iGrid Applications with Advanced Network Technology.
Lawrence G. Roberts CEO Anagran September 2005 Advances Toward Economic and Efficient Terabit LANs and WANs.
EQ-BGP: an efficient inter- domain QoS routing protocol Andrzej Bęben Institute of Telecommunications Warsaw University of Technology,
DaVinci: Dynamically Adaptive Virtual Networks for a Customized Internet Jennifer Rexford Princeton University With Jiayue He, Rui Zhang-Shen, Ying Li,
End-to-end QoE Optimization Through Overlay Network Deployment Bart De Vleeschauwer, Filip De Turck, Bart Dhoedt and Piet Demeester Ghent University -
9/15/2015CS622 - MIRO Presentation1 Wen Xu and Jennifer Rexford Department of Computer Science Princeton University Chuck Short CS622 Dr. C. Edward Chow.
The Internet ISP Internet Backbone Provider Internet Backbone Provider Internet Backbone Provider ISP.
Multicast Routing Algorithms n Multicast routing n Flooding and Spanning Tree n Forward Shortest Path algorithm n Reversed Path Forwarding (RPF) algorithms.
1 Impact of transmission errors on TCP performance (Nitin Vaidya)
Vytautas Valancius, Nick Feamster, Akihiro Nakao, and Jennifer Rexford.
CCNA 2 Week 9 Router Troubleshooting. Copyright © 2005 University of Bolton Topics Routing Table Overview Network Testing Troubleshooting Router Issues.
Trajectory Sampling for Direct Traffic Oberservation N.G. Duffield and Matthias Grossglauser IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, Vol. 9, No. 3 June 2001.
DaVinci: Dynamically Adaptive Virtual Networks for a Customized Internet Jiayue He, Rui Zhang-Shen, Ying Li, Cheng-Yen Lee, Jennifer Rexford, and Mung.
Intradomain Traffic Engineering By Behzad Akbari These slides are based in part upon slides of J. Rexford (Princeton university)
Supporting DiffServ with Per-Class Traffic Engineering in MPLS.
ICNP 2006 Inter­domain Policy Violations in Overlay Routes Srinivasan Seetharaman, Mostafa Ammar Networking and Telecommunications Group College of Computing.
Challenges in the Next Generation Internet Xin Yuan Department of Computer Science Florida State University
Optimization Problems in Wireless Coding Networks Alex Sprintson Computer Engineering Group Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering.
1 Transport Layer: Basics Outline Intro to transport UDP Congestion control basics.
Improving Fault Tolerance in AODV Matthew J. Miller Jungmin So.
Internet Telephony Conference and EXPO East An Overview of QoS for Multi-Service IP Networks Peter Thompson Chief Scientist U4EA Technologies Ltd.
An End-to-End Service Architecture r Provide assured service, premium service, and best effort service (RFC 2638) Assured service: provide reliable service.
1 Traffic Engineering By Kavitha Ganapa. 2 Introduction Traffic engineering is concerned with the issue of performance evaluation and optimization of.
Internet Traffic Engineering Motivation: –The Fish problem, congested links. –Two properties of IP routing Destination based Local optimization TE: optimizing.
Network Layer Lecture Network Layer Design Issues.
Network Layer COMPUTER NETWORKS Networking Standards (Network LAYER)
What Are Routers? Routers are an intermediate system at the network layer that is used to connect networks together based on a common network layer protocol.
VoIP Phones - New era of communication
P4P: ISPs and P2P Laird Popkin, Pando Networks Doug Pasko, Verizon.
Kevin Lee & Adam Piechowicz 10/10/2009
Data and Computer Communications
Presentation transcript:

Achieving good end-to-end service using Bill-Pay Cristian Estan, Aditya Akella, Suman Banerjee Univ. of Wisconsin - Madison

QoS today ISPs offer SLAs to customers SLAs do not apply for multi-ISP paths Core problem: end users cannot pay intermediate ISPs Bill-Pay allows such payments

Overview What is the Bill-Pay mechanism? What can we build on top of it? What were they thinking?

ISP X ISP Y ISP Z A B Bill-Pay example

Core ideas Nanopayments associated with packets Sender sets initial nanopayment Easy-to-enforce local bilateral contract Upstream must pay (at the end of month) Downstream has no contractual obligation Downstream has incentive to provide good service, pay next ISP Sender has some control over path

Protocol mechanics ISPs offer a few “opaque alternatives” Can mean: next hop, diffserv class, internal route Sender OAD = desired treatment by an ISP Nanopayment amountPathlen ISP identifier (AS number) Available alternatives OADcnt Choice ISP identifier (AS number) Undesirable alternativesChoice Pathlen OADcnt ISP OAD User OAD

Overview What is the Bill-Pay mechanism? What can we build on top of it? What were they thinking?

Solutions using Bill-Pay Better e2e delay, throughput, loss rate Handling floods and flash crowds The users valuing the service the most get through, the other traffic is dropped Micropayments (between any 2 hosts) Requiring micropayments with s will kill the spammers’ business model

Overview What is the Bill-Pay mechanism? What can we build on top of it? What were they thinking?

ISPs will jack up prices! Justifiable fees Fixed per byte/per packet Congestion pricing Avoiding “unjustifiable” fees If there is path diversity, users will direct traffic through cheaper paths With chokepoints/unregulated monopolies, users pay a lot even with flat prices

Too costly for ISPs to deploy! Potential benefits are huge Users in industrialized countries spend on average extra $10/year → $10 billion/year Backbones running at higher link utilization → savings of ?? billions/year Skimming 1% of all micropayments (<$5) in the U.S. → $10 billion/year

Mapping is expensive! Can share information w/ other hosts on the same campus (or p2p network) Can use non-critical traffic (instead of probes) to measure new paths Typical AS path length is 3 Sender does not need full information One good path is enough

Hackers will steal the money! Hijack computer, leak nanopayments, get money at the end of the month Solution: “digital secretary” running on trusted hardware must certify packets Network verifies signatures at edge Limited functionality → unhackable Increases cost of solution

Hard to judge a packet’s worth! Can talk to the user directly Trade-off between intrusiveness and cost of guessing wrong If user (or digital secretary) cannot tell apart important traffic from excessive junk, he cannot expect quality service!

Open questions Optimal behavior for rational ISP? How to “modulate” nanopayments? Interactions with congestion control? Effect on network topology? Path selection and stability?

The end Fire at will!

We hate usage-based pricing! 1. Not if we get a good deal! 2. User can refuse to add nanopayments

Load-aware routes = instability IP routing: all packets to a destination take the same path → flapping Bill-Pay: senders make desynchronized decisions → load balancing