Page Page 11
Design and Analysis of Survivable Design and Analysis of Survivable Multipath Provisioning Multipath Provisioning
In Telecom Mesh NetworksIn Telecom Mesh Networks
Sheng HuangSheng Huang
PhD Exit SeminarDept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering,
University of California, Davis
Sheng Huang, UC DavisSheng Huang, UC Davis
Page Page 22
OutlineOutline
• Introduction• Research Contributions
Survivable Multipath Provisioning with Differential Delay Constraint.
Adaptive Reliable Multipath Provisioning.
Survivable Traffic Grooming with Inverse Multiplexing.
A Multistate Multipath Provisioning Scheme for Differentiated Failures in Telecom Mesh Networks.
Page Page 33
Telecommunication Network HierarchyTelecommunication Network Hierarchy
Long haul: 100s-1000s kmbackbone networks, Meshes
Metro: 10s kmRings
Access: a few km Hubbed Rings
Users
Page Page 44
Multipath ProvisioningMultipath Provisioning
Courtesy: K. Zhu, et al. Traffic Grooming in Next-Generation SONET/SDH
Page Page 55
Multipath ProvisioningMultipath Provisioning
• Next-generation SONET/SDH technologies: Virtual Concatenation (VCAT);
Link Capacity Adjustment Scheme (LCAS);
Generic Framing Procedure (GFP) -- GFP-F, GFP-T.
Issue: Differential Delay Constraint
Page Page 66
Multipath ProvisioningMultipath Provisioning
• Advantages:
-- Scalability;
-- Efficiency;
-- Compatibility;
-- Resilience;
-- Bandwidth on Demand (with LCAS).
• Disadvantages:
-- Complexity;
-- Differential-Delay Constraint.
Page Page 77
Network SurvivabilityNetwork Survivability
• Survivability is critical in telecom networks.
single fiber cut -- data and revenue loss.
• Survivable Multipath Provisioning Challenges:
Protect multiple primary paths; DDC-aware;
• Connection Availability, Service-Level-Agreement (SLA).
• Explore LCAS capability.
Page Page 88
Survivable Multipath Provisioning Survivable Multipath Provisioning with Differential Delay Constraintwith Differential Delay Constraint
In Telecom Mesh NetworksIn Telecom Mesh Networks[1][1]
[1] S. Huang, B. Mukherjee, and C. Martel, “Survivable Multipath Provisioning with Differential Delay Constraint in Telecom Mesh Networks,” in Proc. of INFOCOM 2008, Phoenix, AZ, pages 191-195, Apr. 2008.
Page Page 99
Introduction: Differential DelayIntroduction: Differential Delay
Route Dist.
(km)
Delay
(ms)
6-8-11 2000 10
6-5-10-11 3800 19
6-7-9-12-11 3900 19.5
Next-Generation SONET/SDH Technologies: GFP, VCAT and LCAS
Framer/Mapper Device:DD Compensation: Internal memory and SDRAM
( , ) *5 /i j i jP P P P i jDD D D L L s km
Differential Delay (DD) between path Pi and Pj is:
Page Page 1010
SMP Problem StatementSMP Problem Statement
Given:
Input Network
Sequence Request (s, d, B)
Goal:
Route the request and provide backup capacity such that we can still send B units of bandwidth even if there is a single link failure.
Optimizations: Short primary paths, reduce backup capacity used.
Page Page 1111
Survivable Multipath Provisioning IssuesSurvivable Multipath Provisioning Issues• Differential-Delay Constraint (DDC). - Operation, Administration, Maintenance & Provisioning. - Quality of Service. - Destination node compensation capability.
• Survivability: efficiency and fast fault-recovery.
• Route computation: low signaling-overhead; simple management; low complexity.
• Backup sharing: Backup path selection and sharable backup capacity calculation.
Page Page 1212
SMP: Solution ApproachSMP: Solution Approach
2wP
s d
.
.
.
1wP
KwP
bP
Request : <s, d, B, DDC> O-K-Paths & SPLIT O-K-Paths: Optimal K link-disjoint paths which satisfy DDC SPLIT: Shared Protection of Largest Individual Traversed link
Request (s, d, B); B is multiples of VCAT granularity gB: K primary paths carry B/K units eachBackup (Excess Capacity): B/K
DDC
s d
20
20
20
20
(s, d, 60)
example
The more paths the less capacity the backup path needs, but finding many link-disjoint paths meeting DDC is challenging (main result of this research).
Page Page 1313
Finding More SFinding More SD PathsD Paths
• Differential-Delay-Constrained K Link-Disjoint Paths SPLIT.
Basic Idea: Recombining sub-paths
KDP:S-a-b-D and S-c-b-d-D
DD = (4+5+6+2) - (1+2+3) = 11
S ba D
c d4
1 2 3
5 6 2
S ba D
c d4
1 2 3
5 6 2
Recombine Sub-paths:We can get : S-a-b-d-D and S-c-b-D
DD = (4+5+3) - (1+2+6+2) = 1
Page Page 1414
Heuristic AlgorithmsHeuristic Algorithms[1][1]
SPLIT-DDCKDP1. Find a set of k-shortest edge-disjoint paths s-d.
2. Define merge nodes. Build an auxiliary graph G’, whose vertices are merge nodes.
3. Generate all simple paths from s to d in G’.
4. Find the Largest disjoint path set meeting DDC (O-K-paths).
5. Select best backup path among O-K-paths and assign capacity.
SPLIT-KDP1. Find a set of k-shortest edge-disjoint paths s-d.
2. Find maximum of paths which meet DDC.
3. Select best backup path and assign capacity.
[1] S. Huang, B. Mukherjee, and C. Martel, “Survivable Multipath Provisioning with Differential Delay Constraint in Telecom Mesh Networks,” in Proc. of INFOCOM 2008, Phoenix, AZ, pages 191-195, Apr. 2008.
Page Page 1515
DDCKDP: Finding All Paths in Auxiliary GraphDDCKDP: Finding All Paths in Auxiliary Graph
• Looking at all combinations of paths in G’ is exponential worst case, but in practice never finds more than 64 paths.
• Simulated on two typical backbone networks one of which is significantly larger than the other.
Page Page 1616
DDCKDP Results: Example 6DDCKDP Results: Example 61111
Route Dist. (km) DDC:
6-8-11 2000 800 (4ms)
6-5-10-11 3800
6-7-9-12-11 3900
6-2-1-5-8-10-14-15-11 8550
Route Dist. (km) DDC:
6-5-8-11 3200 800 (4 ms)
6-8-10-11 3300
6-7-9-12-11 3900
Simulation Backbone Topology (link distance in km)
KDP
DDCKDP
Page Page 1717
DDCKDP Procedure: Example 6DDCKDP Procedure: Example 61111
From KDP Alg.:6-8-11, 20006-5-10-11, 38006-7-9-12-11, 39006-2-1-5-8-10-14-15-11, 8550
Get all set of disjoint paths from auxiliary graph: worst case exponential.Simulation records: the number of simple path & set are small (max path #32, set # 64 ).
Page Page 1818
Backup Sharing: Single Joint Path VCGsBackup Sharing: Single Joint Path VCGs
Non-Sharable
Sharable
Working
Backup
Free S1 D1
S2 D2
a b
If primary paths are disjoint, we can share backup capacity
Link capacity distribution
Backup capacity is shared on
Sub-path a b
Page Page 1919
Backup Sharing: Multiple Joint Paths VCGsBackup Sharing: Multiple Joint Paths VCGs
S1
x y
D1S2 D2
S1
x y
D1S2 D2
Non-Sharable
Sharable
Working
Backup
Free
(No Share)
Share
S2 — D2 : new connection
Page Page 2020
Backup Sharing: Calculate Backup CapacityBackup Sharing: Calculate Backup Capacity
• For each arc, keep track of the primary and backup paths it is currently participating in, and how long those connections will continue.
• Maintain limited number of conflict set for each arc.
• From the conflict set, calculate the maximum sharable capacity on the arc.
• Calculate the Potential Reserved Backup Resource (PRBR) on candidate path and pick the one with minimum PRBR.
Page Page 2121
Illustrative Numerical Results : Topology 1Illustrative Numerical Results : Topology 1
Arrival: Independent Holding time: a negative exp. dist.Connections: uniform distributed
16 wavelengths per linkOC-192 per wavelengthFull wavelength conversion
VCAT granularity: STS-1Experiments for several DDC’s: {5ms, 8ms, 10ms, 20ms, 50ms}
Performance Metrics:Bandwidth Blocking Ratio (BBR)Resource Overbuild (RO)
Requests bandwidth dist.: 50M:100M:150M:600M:1G:2.5G:5G:10G
=100:50:20:10:10:4:2:1
Page Page 2222
Topology 1: Bandwidth Blocking Ratio vs. DDCTopology 1: Bandwidth Blocking Ratio vs. DDC
Page Page 2323
T1: Bandwidth Blocking Ratio: DDCKDP vs. KDPT1: Bandwidth Blocking Ratio: DDCKDP vs. KDP
Page Page 2424
Topology 1: Resource Overbuild vs. DDCTopology 1: Resource Overbuild vs. DDC
Page Page 2525
T1: Resource Overbuild: DDCKDP vs. KDPT1: Resource Overbuild: DDCKDP vs. KDP
Page Page 2626
Illustrative Numerical Results: Topology 2Illustrative Numerical Results: Topology 2
Sample U.S. backbone network: 60 nodes, 91 bidirectional links
Page Page 2727
Topology 2: Bandwidth Blocking Ratio vs. DDCTopology 2: Bandwidth Blocking Ratio vs. DDC
Page Page 2828
T2: Bandwidth Blocking Ratio:
T2: Bandwidth Blocking Ratio: DDCKDP vs. KDPT2: Bandwidth Blocking Ratio: DDCKDP vs. KDP
Page Page 2929
Topology 2: Resource Overbuild vs. DDCTopology 2: Resource Overbuild vs. DDC
Page Page 3030
T2: Resource Overbuild: DDCKDP vs. KDPT2: Resource Overbuild: DDCKDP vs. KDP
Page Page 3131
DDCKDP In the Case of Null DDCDDCKDP In the Case of Null DDC
• DDCKDP is an efficient protection scheme even when DDC is not an issue.
• We compare our approach (with a large DDC) to one of the best multi-path protection schemes (not considering DDC) that also exploits shared backup resources.
Page Page 3232
DDCKDP vs. PIVM Ignoring DDCDDCKDP vs. PIVM Ignoring DDC
PIVM: Protecting Individual VCG Member2 (Non-DDC)
[2] C. Ou, L. Sahasabuddle, K. Zhu, C. Martel, and B. Mukherjee, “Survivable Virtual Concatenation for Data Over SONET/SDH in Optical Transport Networks,” IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, vol. 14, pp. 218-231, Feb. 2006.
Page Page 3333
ConclusionConclusion
• Exploiting O-K-paths and SPLIT are efficient approaches for SMP (Survivable Multipath Provisioning). DDCKDP outperforms KDP.
• The improvements of DDCKDP is substantial when DDC is small. With 8ms DDC, DDCKDP can achieve more than 50% improvements in BBR over KDP.
• SPLIT-DDCKDP is a resource-efficient, low-signaling-overhead, fast-fault-recovery approach for SMP with DDC.
• Just as a backup method (ignoring the DDC issue), DDCKDP improves on the best prior work for SMP.
Page Page 3434
Adaptive Reliable Multipath Adaptive Reliable Multipath Provisioning in Survivable Provisioning in Survivable WDM Mesh NetworksWDM Mesh Networks[3,4][3,4]
[3] S. Huang, B. Mukherjee, “Adaptive Reliable Multipath Provisioning in Survivable WDM Mesh Networks,” in Proc. of ICC 2008, Beijing, China, May 19-23, 2008.
[4] S. Huang, C. Martel, and B. Mukherjee, “Adaptive Reliable Multipath Provisioning in Survivable WDM Mesh Networks,” IEEE J. Sel. Areas Communication, to appear.
Page Page 3535
IntroductionIntroduction
• Network operators provide service based on service-level agreement (SLA).
• Differential-delay constraint (DDC) for MP.
• Multipath provisioning: pros and cons.
• Adaptive: Availability-Aware, DDC-Aware, Resource-Efficiency-Aware.
• Reliable: Availability (SLA) guaranteed service.
Page Page 3636
Multipath ProvisioningMultipath Provisioning
• Multipath Provisioning – M:N(m)
M: primary N: backup (m): multipath
3:0(m), 2:0(m) : DDC
s-d : 150 Mbps, consider all link availabilities to be 0.999, different SLA.Primary paths only
150 Mbps: 0.99100 Mbps: 0.999950 Mbps: 0.9999999
150 Mbps: 0.9975 Mbps: 0.99999
150 Mbps: 0.997
Page Page 3737
Multipath ProvisioningMultipath Provisioning
• Multipath Provisioning – M:N(m)
2:1(m): DDC
150 Mbps: 0.999975 Mbps: 0.9999999
s-d : 150 Mbps, consider all link availabilities to be 0.999, different SLA.Primary & Backup paths
150 Mbps: 0.99999 150 Mbps: 0.9999999
Page Page 3838
Multipath ProvisioningMultipath Provisioning
• M : N (m) two connection blocking situations:
Availability Blocking: Blocked because of no connection meet SLA. No M : N (m) connection between s-d pair is found that meets SLA.
Bandwidth Blocking: Blocked because of capacity limitation. A M : N (m) connection that meets SLA can be found. But it failed on bandwidth allocation (no enough free capacity).
Page Page 3939
Connection Availability AnalysisConnection Availability Analysis
Availability of any k out of M;Availability of any k out of N.
where:AR: connection availability;M: number of primary paths;N: the number of backup paths;
Page Page 4040
Bandwidth Migration with LCASBandwidth Migration with LCAS
• Type 1: Local bandwidth migration among primary paths.
(a) R2 blocked bottleneck link a-b, after migration (b) R2R2 accepted !accepted !
Reduce bandwidth blocking
(working, free, availability)
Page Page 4141
Bandwidth Migration with LCASBandwidth Migration with LCAS
• Type 2: Global bandwidth migration for lower backup capacity.
(a) Backup capacity 28 after migration (b) Backup capacity 24,
(working, free, availability)
Averaging
save 4!save 4!
Page Page 4242
Heuristic Algorithm: MPAG-BMHeuristic Algorithm: MPAG-BM[3][3]
• MPAG-BM: Multipath Provisioning with Availability Guarantee using Bandwidth Migration.
Input: Graph, Network State, Connection Request (s, d, B, DDC, SLA).
Output: M:N(m) provisioning meet B, SLA, and DDC.
1. Compute DDC-aware M link-disjoint paths between s-d pair.
2. Try no backup MP: M:0(m), (M-1):0(m), … 2:0(m).
3. Try single Meet-SLA-Path (cheapest path among several meet SLA paths).
4. Try MP with backup – overbuild low to high: e.g.,3:1(m), 2:1(m), etc.
5. Assign capacity and reserve backup. If necessary, perform Type-1 migration.
6. Accept, Allocate and Update. If necessary, perform Type-2 migration.
Page Page 4343
Heuristic Algorithm: MPAG-BMHeuristic Algorithm: MPAG-BMRequest Arrives
Request DepartsUpdate Network
State
No-Backup MPM : 0 (m)
M=MaxDP
M = M-1
AR ≥ SLA AR ≥ SLAAR ≥ SLA
Single Path MSP
Backup MPM:N(m)
(M=MaxDP-1,N=1) (N/M) +
Assign Capacity(M:N(m))
OK Type-2 BM
Type-1 BM OK Request Blocked
Request Accepted
Y
N
Y Y
N N (M > 1)
NN
N
N (M > 1)
Y
Y
Page Page 4444
Heuristic Algorithm: MPAGHeuristic Algorithm: MPAG
• MPAG: Multipath Provisioning with Availability Guarantee.
MPAG is MPAG-BM without Bandwidth Migration.
• MPAG-BM: Need LCAS support.
MPAG: In case of no LCAS support.
• Bandwidth Migration conditions:
Type 1: local, when bandwidth blocking.
Type 2: global, after network state changes ( e.g., connection departs).
Page Page 4545
Illustrative Numerical ExampleIllustrative Numerical Example
Sample U.S. topology (link distances in 1000 km).
Request bandwidth distribution:100M : 150M : 600M : 1G : 2.5G : 5G : 10G = 50 : 20 : 10 : 10 : 4 : 2 : 1SLA: uniform {0.99, 0.999, 0.9999}Link availability: uniform {0.999, 0.9999, 0.99999}
• DDC: {8ms, 18ms}• Wavelength convertible• 16 wavelength per fiber.• VCAT granularity: STS-1• Wavelength channel : STS-192• Request: uniform dist.• Arrival: Independent Poisson, • Holding time: neg. exp. dist.
Page Page 4646
Illustrative Numerical ExampleIllustrative Numerical Example
Single, MPAG DDC = 8ms, MPAG-BM DDC = 8ms BBR Comparison
Page Page 4747
Illustrative Numerical ExampleIllustrative Numerical ExampleSingle, MPAG DDC = 8ms, MPAG-BM DDC = 18ms BBR Comparison
Page Page 4848
Illustrative Numerical ExampleIllustrative Numerical Example
Single, MPAG DDC = 8ms, MPAG-BM DDC = 50ms BBR Comparison
Page Page 4949
Illustrative Numerical ExampleIllustrative Numerical Example
Page Page 5050
Illustrative Numerical ExampleIllustrative Numerical Example
Page Page 5151
Illustrative Numerical ExampleIllustrative Numerical Example
Page Page 5252
Illustrative Numerical ExampleIllustrative Numerical Example
Page Page 5353
ConclusionConclusion
• M : N (m) can meet ultra-high availability SLA.
• Both MPAG and MPAG-BM are significantly better
than single-path provisioning in all cases.
• DDC value impact the performance in both algorithms.
• With bandwidth migration, MPAG-BM performs better than MPAG with different load and DDC.
Page Page 5454
Survivable Traffic Grooming with Survivable Traffic Grooming with Inverse Multiplexing in Telecom Inverse Multiplexing in Telecom
Mesh NetworksMesh Networks[5][5]
[5] S. Huang, B. Mukherjee, “Survivable Multipath Traffic Grooming in Telecom Mesh Networks with Inverse Multiplexing,” in Optical Network Design and Modeling, 2009.ONDM 2009. International Conference on, Braunschweig, Germany, Feb. 2009, pp. 1–6.
Page Page 5555
Outline
• Introduction.• Node Architecture and Problem Statement.• f-lightpath, Analytical Model, Protection-at-
Connection (MP-PAC) Protection-at-Lightpath (MP-PAL).
• Heuristic Algorithm: MP-PAC, MP-PAL.• Illustrative Numerical Examples.• Conclusions.
Page Page 5656
IntroductionIntroduction
• Features in Multipath Traffic GroomingFeatures in Multipath Traffic Grooming sub-connection grooming; a connection can be carried by multiple sub-connection grooming; a connection can be carried by multiple
wavelengths. Survivability is critical.wavelengths. Survivability is critical.
• Subject to Multiple ConstraintsSubject to Multiple Constraints
-- DDC: Differential-Delay Constraint-- DDC: Differential-Delay Constraint
-- IMF: Inverse-Multiplexing Factor-- IMF: Inverse-Multiplexing Factor
-- Grooming Ports: Grooming-Add/Drop, Bypass.-- Grooming Ports: Grooming-Add/Drop, Bypass.
• Enabling TechnologyEnabling Technology
-- VCAT: Virtual Concatenation; -- VCAT: Virtual Concatenation;
VCG: a group of VCAT for same connectionVCG: a group of VCAT for same connection
Page Page 5757
Constraints
• IMF:
• Grooming ports:
W-fabric
G-fabric adddrop
Page Page 5858
Simplified Node Architecture
Wavelength SwitchFabric
(W-Fabric)
Tx Rx
Grooming Fabric (G-Fabric)
buffer
Local Add Local Drop
Split: connection sub-connectionsAggregate: sub-connections connection
One connection can be carried by multiple wavelength channel
Grooming:Drop, Add, Pass-through
Buffer is used for differential-delay compensation
… …
… …
… …
… …
……Fiber In Fiber Out
Page Page 5959
Problem Statement
• Given:
Network G = (V, E, C, D, W, P, g, DDC, IMF)
Request R = <s, d, B, th>
• Task: Route each R, w.r.t. DDC, IMF.• Requirements:
Every R needs to be protected against single fiber link failure while minimizing the extra cost of working and backup paths.
• Note: Backup capacity can be shared (disjoint working
paths). A special case (IMF =1, DDC=∞) is NP-Complete. Heuristic algorithm is desired.
Page Page 6060
Multipath Grooming Issues
• Single-Primary-Path Grooming: Generic Graph Model -- λ layer, lightpath layer, access
layer, One Node Six-Vertices model
• Generic model cannot be adopted for multipath grooming directly.
• Lightpaths are set up over “constrained” link-disjoint paths.
• It requires new analytical model.
Page Page 6161
Layered Analytical Model
Connection
f-lightpath
Lightpath
Physical Topology
Backup Sharing
Routing
Setup connection:1) Calculate disjoint paths from physical topology2) Search or setup lightpath3) Build f-lightpath4) Select backup and assign capacity5) Find sharable backup capacity using conflict set model6) Reserve capacity7) Add f-lightpath and establish connection
Teardown: Reverse process.
setup teardown
Page Page 6262
Protect Methods, f-lightpath
• MP-PAL: protection-at-lightpath level
Save grooming ports for backup lightpath.
• MP-PAC: protection-at-connection level
both working and backup can use same wavelength channel.
• f-lightpath: a flow of lightpath containing one link-disjoint backup path and multiple disjoint primary paths. A path includes one or a sequence of lightpath.
Example:
f-lightpath Primary Backup
flp1( l1, l5 ) ( l2, l3, l8,)
flp2( l4, l5 ),
( l6 )
( l7, l7)
Page Page 6363
Provisioning Example
Page Page 6464
Illustrative Numerical Examples
Bandwidth distribution:STS −3c : STS −12c : STS −21c :STS−48c : STS−96c : STS−192c = 20 : 10 : 10 : 4 : 2 : 1
Assumptions:• Poisson arrival • Neg.-exp.–dist. holding time• Uniformly dist. node pair • 16 wavelength per unidir. link • Always select the shorter path as working paths• grooming ports parameter ∆• Full wavelength conversion
Main Performance Metrics:Bandwidth Blocking Ratio (BBR)Resource Overbuild (RO)
Page Page 6565
MP-PAC BBR and RO vs. IMFMP-PAC BBR and RO vs. IMF
Page Page 6666
MP-PAL BBR and RO vs. IMFMP-PAL BBR and RO vs. IMF
Page Page 6767
Comparison BBR: MP-PAC vs. MP-PALComparison BBR: MP-PAC vs. MP-PAL
Page Page 6868
Comparison RO: MP-PAC vs. MP-PALComparison RO: MP-PAC vs. MP-PAL
Page Page 6969
MP-PAC BBR and RO vs. Grooming PortMP-PAC BBR and RO vs. Grooming Port
Page Page 7070
MP-PAL BBR and RO vs. Grooming PortMP-PAL BBR and RO vs. Grooming Port
Page Page 7171
Comparison BBR: MP-PAC vs. MP-PAL
Page Page 7272
Comparison RO: MP-PAC vs. MP-PAL
Page Page 7373
Conclusions
• Network performance can be notably improved by exploiting inverse-multiplexing capability.
• Tight constraints have negative impact.• The four layered model is an efficient method
for studying multipath grooming problem.• In general, MP-PAC outperforms MP-PAL
unless grooming ports is moderate or small.
Page Page 7474
A Multistate Multipath Provisioning A Multistate Multipath Provisioning Scheme for DifferentiatedScheme for Differentiated Failures Failures
inin Telecom Mesh NetworksTelecom Mesh Networks[6][6]
[6] S. Huang, Ming Xia, Chip Martel, B. Mukherjee, “A Multistate Multipath Provisioning Scheme for Combating Node Failures in Telecom Mesh Networks,” in 2009 IEEE Military Communications (MILCOM 2009), Boston, USA, Oct. 18-21, 2009.
Page Page 7575
OutlineOutline
• Introduction
• Failure definition and protection
• Provisioning state and transition model
• Problem statement and solutions
• Illustrative numerical examples
• Conclusion
University of California, DavisUniversity of California, Davis
Page Page 7676
IntroductionIntroduction
• Disaster failures have significant impact on communication Disaster failures have significant impact on communication networks (one node failure in a backbone network with a networks (one node failure in a backbone network with a large area of link failures).large area of link failures).
• Multipath Provisioning inherently provides better Multipath Provisioning inherently provides better survivability to deal with a disaster.survivability to deal with a disaster.
• A lot of network survivability research works assume A lot of network survivability research works assume network nodes are completely reliable, but in reality they are network nodes are completely reliable, but in reality they are subject to disaster failures, e.g., earthquake.subject to disaster failures, e.g., earthquake.
• New research area: survivability against Weapons of Mass New research area: survivability against Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) attack.Destruction (WMD) attack.
University of California, DavisUniversity of California, Davis
Page Page 7777
Introduction: A Simple ExampleIntroduction: A Simple Example
• Request (s-d): STS-24
• Failure at Node m : STS-12 (50% )
• β = 75% Pb=STS-18
1 1bSTS-12; STS-12; P STS-12w wP P
Single-link failure protection is not enough
to protect node failure !
University of California, DavisUniversity of California, Davis
Page Page 7878
Failure Definition and ProtectionFailure Definition and Protection
• Failure definition: SF: Single-link Failure MF: Multi-link Failure DF: Disaster Failure (node failure)
• Node failure in DF: Failure on source or destination node. Failure on an intermediate node.
Source and destination node failures are un-restorable. The connections losing their source/ destination node will be dropped (unless data replication).
University of California, DavisUniversity of California, Davis
Page Page 7979
Failure Definition and Protection (Cont.)Failure Definition and Protection (Cont.)
• SF: Primary/Backup. Multiple link-disjoint paths between s-d pair. Set one as backup.
• MF: Reprovisioning. Reassign capacity on remaining paths. Re-route a connection.
• DF: Degraded service. Proactive capacity assignment to meet the
degraded service requirements (β * B).University of California, DavisUniversity of California, Davis
Page Page 8080
DF (Single-node Failure) Protection
University of California, DavisUniversity of California, Davis
Page Page 8181
DF (Single-node Failure) Protection (Cont.)(Cont.)
Page Page 8282
Provisioning State and Transition Model
• Provisioning State (P-state): P0 : Provisioning without failure. P1 : Provisioning upon SF. P2 : Re-provisioning upon MF. P3 : Provisioning upon DF. Poff : Termination State (blocked, expired, dropped).
• Customer State (C-state): C0 : Guaranteed degraded service. C1 : Low priority, best effort degraded service.
University of California, DavisUniversity of California, Davis
Page Page 8383
State Transition Model
Request
RWA/CA
P0
P1 P2
P3Poff
Event State Transition
SF Arrival P0 P1;
Departure P1 P0;
MF Arrival P0P1; P0P1 P2;
P1 P2;
Departure P1P0; P2P0;
DF Arrival P0P1P2P3;
P0P1P2P3Poff;
P1P2P3;
P1P2P3Poff;
Departure P3P2P0;
• Define Provisioning States: P0 – NF; P1 – SF
P2 – MF; P3 – DF
Poff – Expire/Tear-Down P0, P1, P2 – B ; P3 – β*B
Block
Expire
Accept
University of California, DavisUniversity of California, Davis
Page Page 8484
Problem Statement
• Given: Network G = (V, E, W, g) Request R=<s, d, B, ht, β, βth, Cx>
• Task: Route each request using MP.• Objective:
SF, MF: protection with full bandwidth. DF: degraded service is guaranteed.
C0 : degraded-service guaranteed (β*B). C1: best-effort (βth) with lower priority.
University of California, DavisUniversity of California, Davis
Page Page 8585
Heuristic Algorithms
DREAM-MP-P0/P1:
1. Find Link-Disjoint Paths Set with DDC.
2. Assign Capacity with Node failure aware (disaster-aware).
3. Calculate Backup Share
4. Reserve working and backup capacity.
5. Switch to backup resource for SF protection.
DREAM-MP-P2 (MF):
Given MF information, re-provisioning (no backup).
DREAM-MP-P3 (DF):
1. Find impacted connections and switch to their degraded service in P3 state.
2. Reprovision all existing connections in C0 state (guaranteed level of partial service).
3. Reprovision all existing connections in C1 state (drop it if minimum threshold of original bandwidth can not be provided).
University of California, DavisUniversity of California, Davis
Page Page 8686
Illustrative Numerical Example
• Request Bandwidth distribution:50M : 100M : 600M : 1G : 2.5G : 5G :10G = 50 : 20 : 10 : 10 : 4 : 2 : 1
• Cx distribution: C0:C1=7:3. β (0.5,0.7,0.9) βth = 0.5, 16 wavelengths (STS-192 each).• Failures arrive following
independent memory-less process, and have negative exp. Distributed holding time with 0.01667 mean (12 hours).
• Failures begin to arrive after a total of 20,000 connections arrivals.
• Compare with SPLIT-MP (P0, P1 only).
BDR: Bandwidth Dropping RatioCDR: Connection Dropping RatioBBR: Bandwidth Blocking RatioRO: Resource Overbuild
University of California, DavisUniversity of California, Davis
Page Page 8787
DF Protection Performance StudyDF Protection Performance Study
Page Page 8888
DF Protection Performance Study (Cont.)DF Protection Performance Study (Cont.)
Page Page 8989
MF Performance StudyMF Performance Study
University of California, DavisUniversity of California, Davis
Page Page 9090
SF Performance StudySF Performance Study
University of California, DavisUniversity of California, Davis
Page Page 9191
Disaster-Protection-Zone (DPZ) ProtectionDisaster-Protection-Zone (DPZ) Protection
Link-failure SRG: r1, r2, r3; Node-failure SRG: n1 and n2;Disaster Protection Zone: DPZ0 and DPZ1
University of California, DavisUniversity of California, Davis
Page Page 9292
Comparison for Data ReplicationComparison for Data Replication
University of California, DavisUniversity of California, Davis
Page Page 9393
Comparison for Data ReplicationComparison for Data Replication
Page Page 9494
ConclusionConclusion
• A novel Multipath Provisioning scheme was devised for different failures.
• Connectivity can be significantly maintained even under disaster-failure (node failure) with demonstrated bandwidth efficiency.
• Our algorithm outperforms a generic node-disjoint algorithm.
• Multiple node failure and destination failure are also studied using SRG and data replication.
University of California, DavisUniversity of California, Davis
Page Page 9595
Thank You!
• http://networks.cs.ucdavis.edu/~sheng• Publications• Multipath routing source code• More to come… Makefile for latex, etc.
Top Related