Skip to main content
Log in

Cloud control: voluntary admission control for intranet traffic management

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Information Systems and e-Business Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The Internet backbone of many corporations carries two kinds of traffic: urgent and delayable. Shifting some traffic from peak periods to valleys reduces capacity requirements. We consider the case of managing the delayable traffic by an admission control (AC) system. AC gets link utilization feedback every τ seconds. Delayable opt-in sources obtain permission from AC to transmit for up to τ seconds at a rate not exceeding a limit imposed by AC, renewing permission as needed. Urgent traffic bypasses AC. AC must allocate bandwidth to competing delayable traffic sources. We prove that among all throttling transformations of flows that achieve a desired mean aggregate flow, rate limits on flows minimize the variance of their sum. Furthermore, a single rate limit common to all flows achieves the optimum. Thus, for a single link, AC must decide on a single rate limit for all delayable sources in each τ-second cycle. We evaluate different policies that set the rate limit dynamically in an empirical setting using netflow records on a link on the backbone of Yahoo!. Using historical data, we also derive the best possible reduction in capacity of this link using a closed-form solution to an assignment problem. We show that AC can achieve capacity reduction close to the best possible reduction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. There is much variability in volume and class-ratios across days.

  2. This is reasonable since opt-in controlled sources do not care too much about delays in the discretionary traffic that they send via AC.

  3. Note that AC-negotiated traffic can see delays longer than 10 seconds and therefore capacity reduction can be bigger than in Figure 2.

  4. This pair of parameters is sufficient for AC to transmit almost all class-2 traffic without exceeding the target capacity.

References

  • Benameur N, Fredj SB, Delcoigne F, Oueslati-Boulahia S, Roberts JW (2001) Integrated admission control for streaming and elastic traffic. Qual Future Internet Serv 2156:69–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Key P, Massoulie L, Wang B (2004) Emulating lower priority transport at the application layer: a background transfer service. In: Sigmetrics, pp 118–129

  • Kokku R, Bohra A, Ganguly S, Venkataramani A (2007) A multipath background network architecture. In: Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM

  • Kumar A, Hedge M, Anand SVR, Bindu BN, Thirumurthy D, Kherani AA (2000) Nonintrusive tcp connection admission control for bandwidth management of an internet access link. In: IEEE communications magazine, pp 160–167

  • Kuzmanovic A, Knightly EW (2003) TCP-LP: A distributed algorithm for low priority data transfer. In: Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM

  • Sutton RS, Barto AG (1998) Reinforcement learning: an introduction. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsugawa T, Hasegawa G, Murata M (2006) Background tcp data transfer with inline network measurements. IEICE Trans Commun E89-B No.8:2152–2160

    Google Scholar 

  • Venkataraman V, Francis P, Kodialam MS, Lakshman TV (2008) A priority-layered approach to transport for high bandwidth-delay product networks. In: ACM CoNEXT, Madrid, Spain

  • Venkataramani A, Kokku R, Dahlin M (2002) TCP nice: a mechanism for background transfers. In: Proceedings of the 5th symposium on operating systems design and implementation, Boston, MA

  • Yang S, de Veciana G (2002) Size-based adaptive bandwidth allocation: optimizing the average QoS for elastic flows. In: Proceedings of the 21st annual joint conference of the IEEE computer and communications societies (INFOCOM), pp 657–666

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Raymie Stata for introducing us to this problem. We thank Adam Bechtel and Igor Gashinsky for constantly educating us about practical constraints in operating a large network.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kishore Papineni.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Langford, J., Li, L., McAfee, P. et al. Cloud control: voluntary admission control for intranet traffic management. Inf Syst E-Bus Manage 10, 295–308 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-011-0166-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10257-011-0166-4

Keywords

Navigation