1. A Routing Underlay for Overlay Networks Akihiro Nakao Larry Peterson Andy Bavier SIGCOMM’03 Reviewer: Jing lu

2. Motivation Increasing growth of overlay services:

3. Motivation Common characteristic:  Application-specific routing strategy Approach:  Ping and traceroute to learn underlying Internet topology Increasing growth of overlay services:  Content distribution network  Multicast overlay

4. Motivation Scalability Issues:  In the number of participating nodes RON (Resilient Overlay Networks) doesn’t scale beyond 50 nodes.  Multiple overlays run on a single node/subnet. PlanetLab is an overlay-hosting platform. Observation:  Network itself has multiple viewpoints, and already has a fairly complete picture of the network. Single overlay network re- discovers this information for just itself is redundant and architecturally silly.  Routing underlay can provide a shared set of topology discovery services for overlays, making overlay resource discovery more scalable.

5. Architecture Some representative overlays:  RON routing overlay  End-system Multicast (ESM) overlay  Peer-to-peer systems

6. Architecture RON routing overlay (MIT)  Discover good-quality paths through overlay nodes, and quickly turn to an alternate path when congestion or failure happens to the current path.  A clique of N overlay nodes; Probe N 2 edges to get latency; Run link-state routing algorithm to find the lowest cost routes; Not scale for N > 50.  Routing underlay can provide: Sparsely connected routing mesh of overlay nodes to decrease number of probes; Or, some disjoint paths, and let RON probe just these paths to select the best one. Should one path fails, RON can switch to another.

7. Architecture ESM overlay:  End systems in a multicast group self-organize into an overlay structure using distributed protocol. Adapt to network dynamics and consider application level performance to achieve high efficiency.  Organize end hosts into a mesh; run MST algorithm to produce a multicast tree.  Routing underlay can provide: Nearest neighbors Or, ready-built routing mesh based on knowledge of the underlying network topology.

8. Architecture P2P systems like file sharing networks  Routing underlay can provide: Nearest neighbors to peer with Or, far-away neighbors for data replication in case of local disasters.

9. Architecture Useful underlay services:  Find nearest neighbors to a node  Find disjoint paths between two nodes  Build a routing mesh Three primitives underlay should support:  Provide a graph of the network connectivity at a specified resolution (ASes, Routers, physical links) and scope (the Internet, some AS, everything within a radius of N hops);  Expose actual route a packet traverses at a specified resolution;  Report topological facts about specific paths between a pair of points according to a specified metric (AS hops, router hops, latency).

10. Architecture Features:  Underlay probes the entire network to provide relative static information about the network in low frequency.  Overlay probes dynamically changing network conditions in a reduced scope with higher frequency.

11. Architecture Will routing underlay be accepted?  Infrastructure-based overlays like PlanetLab: “Enforcement” by implementing the probing layer in the OS kernel.  Pure end-system overlays: Underlay service is convenient for application writers. Probing traffic becomes a widely-recognized problem. “Encouragement” from ISPs and network administrators by blocking ping and traceroute traffic

12. Topology Probing kernel Assumptions:  Primitives are support on every overlay node, which has access to the BGP routing table at a nearby BGP router. Three primitives:  Peering Graph  Path Probe  Distance Probe

13. Topology Probing kernel Peering Graph: PG = GetGraph()  Coarse-grain (AS-level) connectivity of the Internet, where each vertex in PG corresponds to an AS, and each edge represents a peering relationship between ASes. All overlay nodes send their BGP tables to a centralized aggregation point. Each overlay node constructs its own PG independently by exchanging PG with neighbors.  PG can be constructed using a fixed number of probes; Peering information changes infrequently, so exchange can be done in low frequency.

14. Topology Probing kernel

15. Path Probe: Path = GetPath(src, dst)  Verified AS path traversed by packets sent from IP address src to IP address dst. Use BGP table to get the actual AS path. Distance Probe: Distance = GetDistance(target, metric)  Distance from the local node to remote target node.  Distance metrics: Number of AS hops Number of router hops RTT

16. Library of Routing Services Find Disjoint Paths: PathSet = DisjointPaths(u, v, N, k)  u, v are a pair of overlay nodes; N is a set of candidate intermediate nodes; k disjoint paths.  Implementation: Use peering graph returned by GetGraph to guess the shortest disjoint paths (u, w, v), w  N; Sort the list by AS count. Use GetPath to verify and drop paths that are not edge- disjoint from the default AS path. Select k paths based on AS hop count.

17. Library of Routing Services Find Nearest Neighbors: Nodes = NearestNodes(N, k)  N is a set of candidate neighbor nodes; k closest to the local node.  Implementation: Use GetPath to sort the list of N neighbors by AS count; Use GetDistance on the top j (j > k) nodes in the list to choose k nodes with lowest latency.

18. Library of Routing Services

19. Building a Representative Mesh: Mesh = BuildMesh(N)  N is a set of overlay nodes;  Implementation: Each overlay node performs analysis (pruning edges) independently using GetPath primitive. Entire mesh can be formed by aggregating all the neighbor sets. Algorithm 1: Prune edge (u, v) if AS path from u to v includes AS W, where w  N is located. Algorithm 2: Prune edge (u, v) if w is directly connected to the AS path from u to v. In both cases, a node need s to keep track of virtualized edges and verify virtualization information with neighbors before pruning.

20. Library of Routing Services

22. Conclusion Overlay networks independently probing the Internet to make application-specific routing decisions is unacceptable in the long run. A shared routing underlay is practical.  Take cost into account  Multiple-layered Lower layers provide coarse-grain static information at large scale. Upper layers probe more frequently for dynamic information at increasingly reduced scale.