6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
1
Riikka Susitaival Supervisor: Professor Jorma Virtamo
Instructors: Ph.D. Pirkko Kuusela Ph.D. Samuli Aalto
Networking Laboratory
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
2
• Background• Objectives• Load balancing algorithms• Routing algorithms to achieve differentiated
services• Results• Conclusion
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
3
• Current IP routing is topology driven– Routers make forwarding decisions
independently– Paths selected using shortest path algorithms
• Multi Protocol Label Switching (MPLS)– combines datagram and virtual circuit
approaches– based on short labels that are used to make
forwarding decision
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
4
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
5
– The most significant application is traffic engineering
– Provide capabilities to split traffic• Load balancing methods
– MPLS provides tools for load balancing– Objective to
• minimize the maximum link load• minimize the mean delay
– Granularity
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
6
• To study MPLS architecture– Technical aspect– Traffic engineering over MPLS
• To study load balancing algorithms– Approximations– Granularity
• To develop flow allocation methods that provide differentiated services
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
7
• The objective is to minimize the mean delay• Based on the delay of M/M/1-queue • 3 different methods implemented and compared• Notation:
– Directed link (m,n) with bandwidth b(m,n)
– Traffic demand d(i,j),, where i is ingress node and jegress node
– R(i,j),k=d(i,j) , if k is egress node, R(i,j),k=-d(i,j) , if k is ingress node, otherwise R(i,j),k =0
– x(i,j),(m,n) traffic of ingress-egress pair (i,j) on link (m,n)
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
8
1. Minimum-delay routing
).,( ,
),,( , tosubj.
,1 Min.
),(),(
),(),(
),(),,(
),(),(
),(),,(),(
),(),(),,(
jiRAx
nmbx
xb
xC
jiji
nmji
jinm
nmji
jinmnm
jijinm
∀=
∀<
−Λ=
�
��
�
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
9
2. LP-NLP optimization• 1st phase min-max optimization:
• 2nd phase: Allocate traffic to the paths obtained from 1st phase solution so that the mean delay is minimized.
.0 ),,( ,
),,(
tosubj.
, Min.
),(),(
),(),(),(
),(),,(
),( ),(),(),,(
>
∀=
∀<+
+−
�
� �
ZjiRAx
nmbZbx
xeZ
jiji
nmnmji
jinm
nm jijinm
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
10
3. Heuristics:• Divide traffic into streams according to the level
of granularity.• Route each stream to the network using Dijkstra’s
algorithm in (i) ascending order in terms of traffic intensity (ii) descending order in terms of traffic intensity (iii) descending order in terms of the mean delay.
• Use the delay of M/M/1/queue as cost of each link.
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
11
Routing algorithms to achieve differentiated service
• The goal is to differentiate the mean delay of different classes (gold and silver), two approaches:– Optimization that relies on routing only– Optimization that uses WFQ-weights to achieve
difference • Weighted Fair Queueing (WFQ) provides desired
portion of bandwidth to each service class
• Approximations
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
12
1. The weights in optimization function
).,(,
),,( tosubj.
, ][ Min.
),(,),(,
),,(),(
),(),,(,
),(),(
),(),,(,),(
),(),(),,(,
l
1
jilRAx
nmbx
xb
xw
DEw
jiljil
nml ji
jinml
nml ji
jinmlnm
l l
jijinmll
ll
∀=
∀<
−Λ
=
��
���
��
�
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
13
2. Optimization so that the ratio of mean delay is fixed to a parameter q.
3. Heuristic approach: The class that should achieve smaller mean delay, is routed first using the heuristic algorithm described above. Allocated traffic of first class is multiplied by a factor of (1+∆) and second class is routed.
.][][
tosubj.
],[ Min
2
1
1
qDEDE
DE
l
l
l
=
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
14
• Optimization using WFQ-weights1. The weights included to the optimization function
).,(,
),,( ,1
),,( , tosubj.
, ][ Min.
),(,),(,
),(,
),,(),(,),(
),(),,(,
),(),(
),(),,(,),(),(,
),(),(),,(,
l
jilRAx
nmg
nmlbgx
xbg
xwDEw
jiljil
lnml
nmnmlji
jinml
l nmji
jinmlnmnml
jijinml
l
lll
∀=
∀=
∀<
−Λ=
�
�
� ��
��
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
15
• Alternative ways to optimize:– Straightforward optimization– Two-level procedure: traffic is first allocated without
WFQ-weights and then WFQ-weights are defined using optimization function above.
– Two-level procedure so that paths are first defined using LP-formulation and then then WFQ-parameters are defined using optimization function above.
2. The ratio of the delays at each link is fixed to a parameter q and WFQ-weights defined as function of q.
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
16
• Test-network:– 10 nodes– 52 links– 72 ingress-egress pairs
• 2 classes, gold and silver– Equal traffic matrices
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
17
0 5 10 15 20 25 30Granularity
0.000125
0.00013
0.000135
0.00014
0.000145
ehT
naem
yaled
The mean delay as the function of granularity
iii
ii
i
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
18
60 70 80 90 100Load as % of maximum
0.0002
0.0005
0.001
0.002
0.005
0.01
ehT
nae
mya
led
0.0002
0.0005
0.001
0.002
0.005
0.01
The mean delay as the function of the percentage of maximum load
Heuristics
LP-NLP
Minimum-delay
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
19
1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2The ratio of mean delay
0.00013
0.00014
0.00015
0.00016
0.00017
ehT
nae
myal
ed
The mean delay as the function of the ratio of mean delay
Heuristics
Fixed
Weights
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
20
1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5The ratio of mean delay
0.00025
0.0003
0.00035
0.0004
ehT
naem
yaled
The mean delay as the function of the ratio of mean delay
Fixed delays, vers. 2
Fixed delays, vers. 1
LP-NLP
Two- step, iterative
Two- step, version 2
Two- step, version 1
Straightforward
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
21
• The use of load balancing improves performance significantly, LP-NLP algorithm reduces the computation time
• The weights used in optimization with WFQ-weights are smaller than in optimization without WFQ-weights
• Increase in mean delay is greater in optimization with WFQ-weights
• The algorithm that allocates first traffic and then determines WFQ-weights, is closest to optimal
6.8.2002 Thesis Seminar on Networking Technology
22
• More optimization, variations of– Topology and size of network– The number of traffic classes– Unequal traffic demand matrices between
classes• Modeling the actual bandwidth provided by
WFQ-scheduling