Abstract
Overlay routing has been widely used in Internet, mainly because of user demands for security, reliability, bandwidth, etc. Many approaches use overlay routing by deploying certain number of overlay nodes and expose them to users. Thus, users have much more flexibility in specifying their end-to-end paths. But these benefits also bring some troubles, e.g., more serious congestions may happen on some links due to the selfish nature of network. In this paper, we adopt ROR (restricted overlay routing) which will not expose all overlay nodes to users, but provide limited number of them while considering overall performance. Different users may get different overlay nodes, and they can still make their choice according to their own demands. We carry out substantial simulations under various topologies and parameters, we show that we can achieve better performance, i.e., lower Min-max link utilization.











Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles and news from researchers in related subjects, suggested using machine learning.Notes
The Poisson flow arrival model is reasonable, as long as there are no correlations on burst in the overlay flow arrival process [35].
References
Andersen DG, Balakrishnan H, Kaashoek F, Morris R (2001) Resilient overlay networks. In: 18th ACM SOSP, Banff, Canada
Andreev K, Maggs BM, Meyerson A, Sitaraman RK (2003) Designing overlay multicast networks for streaming. In: SPAA, pp 149–158
Chen Y, Tang L, Li (2008) Heuristic relay node selection algorithm for one-hop overlay routing. In: ICDCS Workshops, pp 465–470
Clark D, Lehr B, Bauer S, Faratin P, Sami R, Wroclawski J (2006) Overlay networks and the future of the internet. Commun Strateg 63(3):1
Cohen R, Nakibly G (2008) On the computational complexity and effectiveness of n-hub shortest-path routing. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw 16(3):691–704
Di Pillo G, Grippo L, Lucidi S (1993) A smooth method for the finite minimax problem. Math Program 60:187–214. doi:10.1007/BF01580609
Fortz B, Rexford J, Thorup M (2002) Traffic engineering with traditional ip routing protocols. IEEE Commun Mag 40(10):118–124
Friedmang E (2004) A generic analysis of selfish routing. In Proceedings of the 43rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Bahamas, 14–17 Dec 2004
Gummadi PK, Madhyastha HV, Gribble SD, Levy HM, Wetherall D (2004) Improving the reliability of internet paths with one-hop source routing. In: OSDI, pp 183–198
He J, Rexford J (2008) Toward internet-wide multipath routing. IEEE Netw 22(2):16–21
Lee GM, T Choi (2008) Improving the interaction between overlay routing and traffic engineering. Hoc and Sensor Networks Wireless Networks Next Generation Internet 7th International Ifip Tc6 Networking Conference, Singapore 5–9 May 2008
Li A, Lu Y, Yang X (2008) Price of path diversity: in practice and in theory. http://www.cs.duke.edu/nds/papers/ppd.pdf
Li Z, Mohapatra P (2004) Qron: Qos-aware routing in overlay networks. IEEE J Sel Areas Commun 22(1):29–40
Liu Y, Zhang H, Gong W, Towsley DF (2006) On the interaction between overlay routing and underlay routing. In: INFOCOM, pp 2543–2553
lp\(\_\)solve. http://lpsolve.sourceforge.net
Medina A, Matta I, Byers J (2000) Brite: a flexible generator of internet topologies. Technical report, Boston, MA, USA
Motiwala M, Feamster N, Vempala S (2007) Path splicing: reliable connectivity with rapid recovery. In: in Proc, SIGCOMM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networking
Qiu L, Yang YR, Zhang Y, Shenker S (2003) On selfish routing in internet-like environments. In: SIGCOMM ’03: Proceedings of the 2003 conference on Applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 151–162
Roughgarden T (2002) Selfish routing. PhD thesis, Cornell University, 2002
Roughgarden T, Tardos É (2002) How bad is selfish routing? J ACM 49(2):236–259
Savage S, Anderson T, Aggarwal A, Becker D, Cardwell N, Collins A, Hoffman E, Snell J, Vahdat A, Voelker G, Zahorjan J (1999) Detour: Informed internet routing and transport. IEEE Micro 19:50–59
Savage S, Collins A, Hoffman E, Snell J, Anderson TE (1999) The end-to-end effects of internet path selection. In: SIGCOMM, pp 289–299
Seetharaman S, Ammar M (2005) Overlay-friendly native network: a contradiction in terms? In: HOTNETS IV
Seetharaman S, Hilt V, Hofmann M, Ammar MH (2009) Resolving cross-layer conflict between overlay routing and traffic engineering. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw 17(6):1964–1977
Sen A, Hao B, Shen BH, Murthy S, Ganguly S (2005) On multipath routing with transit hubs. In: NETWORKING, pp 1043–1055
Sontag D, Zhang Y, Phanishayee A, Andersen D, Karger D (2009) Scaling all-pairs overlay routing. In: CoNEXT ’09: Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Emerging networking experiments and technologies. ACM, New York, NY, USA, pp 145–156
Spring NT, Mahajan R, Wetherall D (2002) Measuring isp topologies with rocketfuel. In: SIGCOMM, pp 133–145
Tangmunarunkit H, Govindan R, Shenker S, Estrin D (2001) The impact of routing policy on internet paths. In: INFOCOM, pp 736–742
Tao S, Xu K, Xu Y, Fei T, Gao L, Guérin R, Kurose JF, Towsley DF, Zhang ZL (2004) Exploring the performance benefits of end-to-end path switching. In: ICNP, pp 304–315
Vutukury S, Garcia-Luna-Aceves JJ (1999) A simple approximation to minimum-delay routing. In: SIGCOMM, pp 227–238
Wang X, Dong C (2009) Improving generalization of fuzzy if-then rules by maximizing fuzzy entropy. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 17(3):556–567
Wang X, Dong L, Yan J (2012) Maximum ambiguity based sample selection in fuzzy decision tree induction. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 24(8):1491–1505
Wang X, He Y, Wang DD (2014) Non-naive bayesian classifiers for classification problems with continuous attributes. IEEE Trans Cybern 44(1):21–39
Wang X, Xing H, Li Y (2014) A study on relationship between generalization abilities and fuzziness of base classifiers in ensemble learning. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst. doi:10.1109/TFUZZ.2014.2371479
Zhu Y, Dovrolis C, Ammar MH (2006) Dynamic overlay routing based on available bandwidth estimation: a simulation study. Computer Netw 50(6):742–762
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix
Appendix
1.1 Convergence property of ROR routing
Here we will show the convergence property of ROR routing without a rigorous proof.
The basic assumption is that the background traffic won’t be under violent oscillation. If not, the network will be unpredictable.
Assumption 1
The traffic of a incoming or outgoing flows is very small compared to the total traffic between some source and destination. That is, \(\triangle demand(s,t)\rightarrow 0,\forall (s,t)\in V\times V\). This is reasonable for a large ISP network whose total traffic is very large.
Each time a flow enters, \(\triangle demand(s,t)>0\), and a flow leaves leads to \(\triangle demand(s,t)<0\). As a flow is assigned only one overlay node, such that \(o(d_{s,t,v}^{overlay})\) changes with variation of \(\triangle o(d_{s,t,v}^{overlay})\) for some v.
Assumption 2
Each flow leaves with equal probability, which is not controlled by operator. It means that, if \(\triangle demand(s,t)<0\), then \(o(d_{s,t,v}^{overlay})\) changes (\(\triangle o(d_{s,t,v}^{overlay})<0\)) with probability of \(\frac{\triangle o(d_{s,t,v}^{overlay})}{\underset{q\in V}{\sum }\triangle o(d_{s,t,q}^{overlay})}\).
If some flow enters into the network, we assign an overlay node v whose \(g(d_{s,t,v}^{overlay})>0\). After that the real traffic vector between s and t becomes:
While the optimal traffic vector becomes:
Thus the gap between real traffic and optimal traffic is:
We can get\(-2\triangle demand(s,t)\le \triangle o_{v}-\triangle demand(s,t)\le 0\), and as \(\triangle demand(s,t)\) is quite small, so \(2\triangle demand(s,t)<g(d_{s,t,v}^{overlay})\), that is, \(\triangle demand(s,t)-\triangle o_{v}<g(d_{s,t,v}^{overlay})\). Thus we can infer that \(0<g(d_{s,t,v}^{overlay})-\triangle demand(s,t)+\triangle o_{v}\le g(d_{s,t,v}^{overlay})\). With \(\underset{0<i\le n}{\sum }\triangle o_{i}=\triangle demand(s,t)\), finally, we can get \(\underset{q\in V}{\sum }|g'(d_{s,t,q}^{overlay})|\le \underset{q\in V}{\sum }|g(d_{s,t,q}^{overlay})|\), which means ROR routing will draw near to optimal routing when new flow comes in.
If some flow leaves, there is a probability that \(\underset{q\in V}{\sum }|g'(d_{s,t,q}^{overlay})|\) will increase or decrease. But remember that \(\sum \triangle demand(s,t)=0\), for a long time scale when network is stable. Thus most of the time, ROR routing will get close to optimal routing, while away from optimal routing sometimes. In this way, it will come close to optimal after a long time period.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yang, S., Zhao, W., Jiang, Y. et al. Restricted overlay routing. Int. J. Mach. Learn. & Cyber. 7, 275–285 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-015-0437-3
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-015-0437-3