skip to main content
10.1145/3563766.3564092acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescommConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

DIP: unifying network layer innovations using shared L3 core functions

Authors Info & Claims
Published:14 November 2022Publication History

ABSTRACT

The IP protocol has made a great contribution to the development of the Internet and has become the narrow waist of the Internet. However, the fixed packet processing of IP hinders the functional expansion and evolution of the Internet. In order to solve the rigidity of the Internet, our community has proposed various new L3 protocols to better support various network functions at the network layer. In this paper, we propose DIP (Dynamic Internet Protocol), a novel primitive to unify these protocols. DIP builds a common network function core shared by these L3 protocols based on a new L3 function core primitive, named Field Operation (FN). With FNs, each standalone L3 protocol can be decomposed into a combination of multiple FNs, and meanwhile it is feasible to compose various FNs to realize new (derived) L3 protocols. We demonstrate the feasibility of DIP by realizing five radically different network layer protocols1: the canonical IP forwarding, NDN [41], XIA [12], OPT [16], and NDN+OPT (a derived L3 protocol combining the merits of both NDN and OPT). We implement a prototype of DIP and evaluate its forwarding performance.

References

  1. D Scott Alexander, William A Arbaugh, Michael W Hicks, Pankaj Kakkar, Angelos D Keromytis, Jonathan T Moore, Carl A Gunter, Scott M Nettles, and Jonathan M Smith. 1998. The SwitchWare active network architecture. IEEE network 12, 3 (1998), 29--36.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. Andrey Bogdanov, Lars R Knudsen, Gregor Leander, François-Xavier Standaert, John Steinberger, and Elmar Tischhauser. 2012. Key-alternating ciphers in a provable setting: encryption using a small number of public permutations. In Annual international conference on the theory and applications of cryptographic techniques. Springer, 45--62.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. Pat Bosshart, Dan Daly, Glen Gibb, Martin Izzard, Nick McKeown, Jennifer Rexford, Cole Schlesinger, Dan Talayco, Amin Vahdat, George Varghese, et al. 2014. P4: Programming protocol-independent packet processors. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 44, 3 (2014), 87--95.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Dave Clark, Bill Lehr, Steve Bauer, Peyman Faratin, Rahul Sami, and John Wroclawski. 2006. Overlay Networks and the Future of the Internet. Communications and Strategies 63 (2006), 109.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Jon Crowcroft, Steven Hand, Richard Mortier, Timothy Roscoe, and Andrew Warfield. 2003. Plutarch: an argument for network pluralism. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 33, 4 (2003), 258--266.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. Jason A Donenfeld. 2017. WireGuard: Next Generation Kernel Network Tunnel.. In NDSS. 1--12.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Nick Feamster, Jennifer Rexford, and Ellen Zegura. 2014. The road to SDN: an intellectual history of programmable networks. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 44, 2 (2014), 87--98.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. Markus Feilner. 2006. OpenVPN: Building and integrating virtual private networks. Packt Publishing Ltd.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  9. Yong Feng, Zhikang Chen, Haoyu Song, Wenquan Xu, Jiahao Li, Zijian Zhang, Tong Yun, Ying Wan, and Bin Liu. 2022. Enabling In-situ Programmability in Network Data Plane: From Architecture to Language. In 19th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI 22). 635--649.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. Yong Feng, Haoyu Song, Jiahao Li, Zhikang Chen, Wenquan Xu, and Bin Liu. 2021. In-situ programmable switching using rp4: Towards runtime data plane programmability. In Proceedings of the Twentieth ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks. 69--76.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. Songtao Fu, Ke Xu, Qi Li, Xiaoliang Wang, Su Yao, Yangfei Guo, and Xinle Du. 2021. MASK: practical source and path verification based on Multi-AS-Key. In 2021 IEEE/ACM 29th International Symposium on Quality of Service (IWQOS). IEEE, 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Dongsu Han, Ashok Anand, Fahad Dogar, Boyan Li, Hyeontaek Lim, Michel Machado, Arvind Mukundan, Wenfei Wu, Aditya Akella, David G Andersen, et al. 2012. {XIA}: Efficient support for evolvable internetworking. In 9th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI 12). 309--322.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Georgios P Katsikas, Tom Barbette, Dejan Kostic, Rebecca Steinert, and Gerald Q Maguire Jr. 2018. Metron:{NFV} service chains at the true speed of the underlying hardware. In 15th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI 18). 171--186.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Changhoon Kim, Anirudh Sivaraman, Naga Katta, Antonin Bas, Advait Dixit, and Lawrence J Wobker. 2015. In-band network telemetry via programmable dataplanes. In ACM SIGCOMM, Vol. 15.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  15. Dohyung Kim, Jun Bi, Athanasios V Vasilakos, and Ikjun Yeom. 2017. Security of cached content in NDN. IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security 12, 12 (2017), 2933--2944.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. Tiffany Hyun-Jin Kim, Cristina Basescu, Limin Jia, Soo Bum Lee, Yih-Chun Hu, and Adrian Perrig. 2014. Lightweight source authentication and path validation. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM Conference on SIGCOMM. 271--282.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Markus Legner, Tobias Klenze, Marc Wyss, Christoph Sprenger, and Adrian Perrig. 2020. {EPIC}: Every Packet Is Checked in the Data Plane of a {Path-Aware} Internet. In 29th USENIX Security Symposium (USENIX Security 20). 541--558.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  18. Bojie Li, Kun Tan, Layong Luo, Yanqing Peng, Renqian Luo, Ningyi Xu, Yongqiang Xiong, Peng Cheng, and Enhong Chen. 2016. Clicknp: Highly flexible and high performance network processing with re-configurable hardware. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGCOMM Conference. 1--14.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. Xin Liu, Xiaowei Yang, and Yong Xia. 2010. Netfence: preventing internet denial of service from inside out. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 40, 4 (2010), 255--266.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  20. Zhuotao Liu, Hao Jin, Yih-Chun Hu, and Michael Bailey. 2016. Middle-Police: Toward enforcing destination-defined policies in the middle of the Internet. In Proceedings of the 2016 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security. 1268--1279.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Antonis Manousis, Rahul Anand Sharma, Vyas Sekar, and Justine Sherry. 2020. Contention-aware performance prediction for virtualized network functions. In Proceedings of the Annual conference of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication on the applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communication. 270--282.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. James McCauley, Yotam Harchol, Aurojit Panda, Barath Raghavan, and Scott Shenker. 2019. Enabling a permanent revolution in internet architecture. In Proceedings of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication. 1--14.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. Nick McKeown, Tom Anderson, Hari Balakrishnan, Guru Parulkar, Larry Peterson, Jennifer Rexford, Scott Shenker, and Jonathan Turner. 2008. OpenFlow: enabling innovation in campus networks. ACM SIGCOMM computer communication review 38, 2 (2008), 69--74.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. David Naylor, Matthew K Mukerjee, Patrick Agyapong, Robert Grandl, Ruogu Kang, Michel Machado, Stephanie Brown, Cody Doucette, Hsu-Chun Hsiao, Dongsu Han, et al. 2014. XIA: Architecting a more trustworthy and evolvable Internet. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 44, 3 (2014), 50--57.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. Norbert Niebert, Stephan Baucke, Ibtissam El-Khayat, Martin Johnsson, Borje Ohlman, Henrik Abramowicz, Klaus Wuenstel, Hagen Woesner, Jurgen Quittek, and Luis M Correia. 2008. The way 4ward to the creation of a future internet. In 2008 IEEE 19th International Symposium on Personal, Indoor and Mobile Radio Communications. IEEE, 1--5.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Beverly Schwartz, Alden W Jackson, W Timothy Strayer, Wenyi Zhou, R Dennis Rockwell, and Craig Partridge. 1999. Smart packets for active networks. In 1999 IEEE Second Conference on Open Architectures and Network Programming. Proceedings. OPENARCH'99 (Cat. No. 99EX252). IEEE, 90--97.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Haoyu Song. 2013. Protocol-oblivious forwarding: Unleash the power of SDN through a future-proof forwarding plane. In Proceedings of the second ACM SIGCOMM workshop on Hot topics in software defined networking. 127--132.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. Ion Stoica, Daniel Adkins, Shelley Zhuang, Scott Shenker, and Sonesh Surana. 2002. Internet indirection infrastructure. In Proceedings of the 2002 Conference on Applications, Technologies, Architectures, and Protocols for Computer Communications. 73--86.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Ion Stoica and Hui Zhang. 1999. Providing guaranteed services without per flow management. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 29, 4 (1999), 81--94.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Ion Stoica, Hui Zhang, S Shenker, R Yavatkar, D Stephens, A Malis, Y Bernet, Z Wang, F Baker, J Wroclawski, et al. 1999. Per hop behaviors based on dynamic packet states. draft-stoica-diffserv-dps-00. txt (1999).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. Nik Sultana, John Sonchack, Hans Giesen, Isaac Pedisich, Zhaoyang Han, Nishanth Shyamkumar, Shivani Burad, André DeHon, and Boon Thau Loo. 2021. Flightplan: Dataplane disaggregation and placement for p4 programs. In 18th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI 21). 571--592.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Chen Sun, Jun Bi, Zhilong Zheng, Heng Yu, and Hongxin Hu. 2017. NFP: Enabling network function parallelism in NFV. In Proceedings of the Conference of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication. 43--56.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. Lizhuang Tan, Wei Su, Wei Zhang, Jianhui Lv, Zhenyi Zhang, Jingying Miao, Xiaoxi Liu, and Na Li. 2021. In-band network telemetry: A survey. Computer Networks 186 (2021), 107763.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  34. David L Tennenhouse and David J Wetherall. 2002. Towards an active network architecture. In Proceedings DARPA Active Networks Conference and Exposition. IEEE, 2--15.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  35. Christian Tschudin and Richard Gold. 2003. Network pointers. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 33, 1 (2003), 23--28.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. Kizheppatt Vipin and Suhaib A Fahmy. 2018. FPGA dynamic and partial reconfiguration: A survey of architectures, methods, and applications. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 51, 4 (2018), 1--39.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. David Wetherall and David Tennenhouse. 2019. Retrospective on" towards an active network architecture". ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 49, 5 (2019), 86--89.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. Bo Wu, Ke Xu, Qi Li, Zhuotao Liu, Yih-Chun Hu, Martin J Reed, Meng Shen, and Fan Yang. 2018. Enabling efficient source and path verification via probabilistic packet marking. In 2018 IEEE/ACM 26th International Symposium on Quality of Service (IWQoS). IEEE, 1--10.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  39. Jiarong Xing, Kuo-Feng Hsu, Matty Kadosh, Alan Lo, Yonatan Piasetzky, Arvind Krishnamurthy, and Ang Chen. 2022. Runtime programmable switches. In 19th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI 22). 651--665.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. Jiarong Xing, Yiming Qiu, Kuo-Feng Hsu, Hongyi Liu, Matty Kadosh, Alan Lo, Aditya Akella, Thomas Anderson, Arvind Krishnamurthy, TS Eugene Ng, et al. 2021. A Vision for Runtime Programmable Networks. In Proceedings of the Twentieth ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks. 91--98.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. Lixia Zhang, Alexander Afanasyev, Jeffrey Burke, Van Jacobson, KC Claffy, Patrick Crowley, Christos Papadopoulos, Lan Wang, and Beichuan Zhang. 2014. Named data networking. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 44, 3 (2014), 66--73.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Xin Zhang, Hsu-Chun Hsiao, Geoffrey Hasker, Haowen Chan, Adrian Perrig, and David G Andersen. 2011. SCION: Scalability, control, and isolation on next-generation networks. In 2011 IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy. IEEE, 212--227.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. DIP: unifying network layer innovations using shared L3 core functions

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      HotNets '22: Proceedings of the 21st ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks
      November 2022
      252 pages
      ISBN:9781450398992
      DOI:10.1145/3563766

      Copyright © 2022 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 14 November 2022

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • research-article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate110of460submissions,24%
    • Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)47
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)2

      Other Metrics

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader