skip to main content
research-article

Tuneman: Customizing Networks to Guarantee Application Bandwidth and Latency

Published:23 February 2023Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

We examine how to provide applications with dedicated bandwidth and guaranteed latency in a programmable mission-critical network. Unlike other SDN approaches such as B4 or SWAN, our system Tuneman optimizes both routes and packet schedules at each node to provide flows with sub-second bandwidth changes. Tuneman uses node-level optimization to compute node schedules in a slotted switch and does dynamic routing using a search procedure with Quality of Service– (QoS) based weights. This allows Tuneman to provide an efficient solution for mission-critical networks that have stringent QoS requirements. We evaluate Tuneman on a telesurgery network using a switch prototype built using FPGAs and also via simulations on India’s Tata Network. For mission-critical networks with multiple QoS levels, Tuneman has comparable or better utilization than SWAN while providing delay bounds guarantees.

REFERENCES

  1. [1] Agarwal Saksham, Rajakrishnan Shijin, Narayan Akshay, Agarwal Rachit, Shmoys David, and Vahdat Amin. 2018. Sincronia: Near-optimal network design for coflows. In Proceedings of the Conference of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication. ACM, 1629.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  2. [2] Alizadeh Mohammad, Kabbani Abdul, Edsall Tom, Prabhakar Balaji, Vahdat Amin, and Yasuda Masato. 2012. Less is more: Trading a little bandwidth for ultra-low latency in the data center. In Proceedings of the 9th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI’12). 253266.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. [3] Alizadeh Mohammad, Yang Shuang, Sharif Milad, Katti Sachin, McKeown Nick, Prabhakar Balaji, and Shenker Scott. 2013. pfabric: Minimal near-optimal datacenter transport. In ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, Vol. 43. ACM, 435446.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. [4] Ben-Tal Aharon, Ghaoui Laurent El, and Nemirovski Arkadi. 2009. Robust Optimization. Vol. 28. Princeton University Press.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  5. [5] Bennett Jon C. R. and Zhang Hui. 1996. WF/sup 2/Q: Worst-case fair weighted fair queueing. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications (INFOCOM’96), Vol. 1. IEEE, 120128.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. [6] Berkey Judith O. and Wang Pearl Y.. 1987. Two-dimensional finite bin-packing algorithms. J. Operat. Res. Soc. 38, 5 (1987), 423429.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  7. [7] Bernet Yoram, Ford Peter, Yavatkar Raj, Baker Fred, Zhang Lixia, Speer Michael, Braden Robert, Davie Bruce, Wroclawski John, and Felstaine Eyal. 2000. A framework for integrated services operation over diffserv networks. RFC2998 (November 2000).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  8. [8] Bosshart Pat, Gibb Glen, Kim Hun-Seok, Varghese George, McKeown Nick, Izzard Martin, Mujica Fernando, and Horowitz Mark. 2013. Forwarding metamorphosis: Fast programmable match-action processing in hardware for SDN. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 43, 4 (2013), 99110.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. [9] Cao Jing and Wu Wei. 2008. A multi-metric QoS routing method for Ad Hoc network. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Mobile Ad-hoc and Sensor Networks. 99102. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  10. [10] Chen Shigang and Nahrstedt Klara. 1998. On finding multi-constrained paths. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Communications. Conference Record (ICC’98), Vol. 2. IEEE, 874879.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. [11] Cho Inho, Jang Keon, and Han Dongsu. 2017. Credit-scheduled delay-bounded congestion control for datacenters. In Proceedings of the Conference of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication. ACM, 239252.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. [12] Chole Sharad, Fingerhut Andy, Ma Sha, Sivaraman Anirudh, Vargaftik Shay, Berger Alon, Mendelson Gal, Alizadeh Mohammad, Chuang Shang-Tse, Keslassy Isaac, et al. 2017. drmt: Disaggregated programmable switching. In Proceedings of the Conference of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication. ACM, 114.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. [13] Chuanxiong Guo. 2001. SRR: An O (1) time complexity packet scheduler for flows in multi-service packet networks. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 31, 4 (2001), 211222.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. [14] Cizmeci Burak, Xu Xiao, Chaudhari Rahul, Bachhuber Christoph, Alt Nicolas, and Steinbach Eckehard. 2017. A multiplexing scheme for multimodal teleoperation. ACM Trans. Multimedia Comput. Commun. Appl. 13, 2 (2017), 128.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. [15] Cruz Rene L.. 1991. A calculus for network delay. II. Network analysis. IEEE Trans. Inf. Theory 37, 1 (1991), 132141.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. [16] Deng Guo-Cin and Wang Kuochen. 2018. An application-aware QoS routing algorithm for SDN-based IoT networking. In Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Computers and Communications (ISCC’18). IEEE, 0018600191.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. [17] Desmouceaux Yoann, Pfister Pierre, Tollet Jérôme, Townsley Mark, and Clausen Thomas. 2018. 6lb: Scalable and application-aware load balancing with segment routing. IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw. 26, 2 (2018), 819834.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. [18] Eghbali Homa and Wong Vincent W. S.. 2015. Bandwidth allocation and pricing for SDN-enabled home networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC’15). IEEE, 53425347.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. [19] Gao Peixuan, Dalleggio Anthony, Xu Yang, and Chao H. Jonathan. 2022. Gearbox: A hierarchical packet scheduler for approximate weighted fair queuing. In Proceedings of the 19th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI’22). 551565.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. [20] Ghobadi Jeremy Bogle Nikhil Bhatia Manya, Menache Ishai, Bjørner Nikolaj, Valadarsky Asaf, and Schapira Michael. 2019. TeaVaR: Striking the right utilization-availability balance in WAN traffic engineering. In Proceedings of the Conference of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication. ACM.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. [21] Ghorbani Soudeh, Yang Zibin, Godfrey P., Ganjali Yashar, and Firoozshahian Amin. 2017. DRILL: Micro load balancing for low-latency data center networks. In Proceedings of the Conference of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication. ACM, 225238.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. [22] Grosvenor Matthew P., Schwarzkopf Malte, Gog Ionel, Watson Robert N. M., Moore Andrew W., Hand Steven, and Crowcroft Jon. 2015. Queues don’t matter when you can \(\lbrace\)JUMP\(\rbrace\) them! In Proceedings of the 12th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI’15). 114.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. [23] Gvozdiev Nikola, Vissicchio Stefano, Karp Brad, and Handley Mark. 2018. On low-latency-capable topologies, and their impact on the design of intra-domain routing. In Proceedings of the Conference of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication. ACM, 88102.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. [24] Hartert Renaud, Vissicchio Stefano, Schaus Pierre, Bonaventure Olivier, Filsfils Clarence, Telkamp Thomas, and Francois Pierre. 2015. A declarative and expressive approach to control forwarding paths in carrier-grade networks. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 45, 4 (2015), 1528.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. [25] Hong Chi-Yao, Caesar Matthew, and Godfrey P. Brighten. 2012. Finishing flows quickly with preemptive scheduling. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 42, 4 (2012), 127138.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. [26] Hong Chi-Yao, Kandula Srikanth, Mahajan Ratul, Zhang Ming, Gill Vijay, Nanduri Mohan, and Wattenhofer Roger. 2013. Achieving high utilization with software-driven WAN. In ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, Vol. 43. ACM, 1526.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. [27] Jain Sushant, Kumar Alok, Mandal Subhasree, Ong Joon, Poutievski Leon, Singh Arjun, Venkata Subbaiah, Wanderer Jim, Zhou Junlan, Zhu Min, et al. 2013. B4: Experience with a globally-deployed software defined WAN. In ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, Vol. 43. ACM, 314.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. [28] Jalaparti Virajith, Bodik Peter, Menache Ishai, Rao Sriram, Makarychev Konstantin, and Caesar Matthew. 2015. Network-aware scheduling for data-parallel jobs: Plan when you can. In ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, Vol. 45. ACM, 407420.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. [29] Jang Keon, Sherry Justine, Ballani Hitesh, and Moncaster Toby. 2015. Silo: Predictable message latency in the cloud. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Special Interest Group on Data Communication. 435448.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. [30] Kumar Rakesh, Hasan Monowar, Padhy Smruti, Evchenko Konstantin, Piramanayagam Lavanya, Mohan Sibin, and Bobba Rakesh B.. 2017. End-to-end network delay guarantees for real-time systems using sdn. In Proceedings of the IEEE Real-Time Systems Symposium (RTSS’17). IEEE, 231242.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. [31] Kushwaha Aniruddha, Bazard Naveen, and Gumaste Ashwin. 2021. IPv6 flow-label based application aware routing in SDNs. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications Workshops (INFOCOM WKSHPS’21). IEEE, 16.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  32. [32] Liu Zaoxing, Ben-Basat Ran, Einziger Gil, Kassner Yaron, Braverman Vladimir, Friedman Roy, and Sekar Vyas. 2019. Nitrosketch: Robust and general sketch-based monitoring in software switches. In Proceedings of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication. ACM, 334350.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. [33] Malindi Phumzile. 2011. QoS in telemedicine. Telemed. Techn. Appl. IntechOpen, 119–138.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. [34] Mao Hongzi, Schwarzkopf Malte, Venkatakrishnan Shaileshh Bojja, Meng Zili, and Alizadeh Mohammad. 2018. Learning scheduling algorithms for data processing clusters. arXiv:1810.01963. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1810.01963.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  35. [35] McKeown Nick. 1999. The iSLIP scheduling algorithm for input-queued switches. IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw.2 (1999), 188201.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. [36] Mekky Hesham, Hao Fang, Mukherjee Sarit, Zhang Zhi-Li, and Lakshman T. V.. 2014. Application-aware data plane processing in SDN. In Proceedings of the 3rd Workshop on Hot Topics in Software Defined Networking. 1318.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. [37] Mittal Radhika, Agarwal Rachit, Ratnasamy Sylvia, and Shenker Scott. 2016. Universal packet scheduling. In Proceedings of the 13th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI’16). 501521.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. [38] Montazeri Behnam, Li Yilong, Alizadeh Mohammad, and Ousterhout John. 2018. Homa: A receiver-driven low-latency transport protocol using network priorities. In Proceedings of the Conference of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication. ACM, 221235.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. [39] Na Songun and Yoo Seungwha. 2002. Allowable propagation delay for VoIP calls of acceptable quality. In International Workshop on Advanced Internet Services and Applications. Springer, 4755.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  40. [40] Parekh Abhay K. and Gallager Robert G.. 1994. A generalized processor sharing approach to flow control in integrated services networks: The multiple node case. IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw. 2, 2 (1994), 137150.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. [41] Perry Jonathan, Ousterhout Amy, Balakrishnan Hari, Shah Devavrat, and Fugal Hans. 2015. Fastpass: A centralized zero-queue datacenter network. ACM SIGCOMM Comput. Commun. Rev. 44, 4 (2015), 307318.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. [42] Saeed Ahmed, Dukkipati Nandita, Valancius Vytautas, Contavalli Carlo, Vahdat Amin, et al. 2017. Carousel: Scalable traffic shaping at end hosts. In Proceedings of the Conference of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication. ACM, 404417.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  43. [43] Saeed Ahmed, Zhao Yimeng, Dukkipati Nandita, Zegura Ellen W., Ammar Mostafa H., Harras Khaled, and Vahdat Amin. 2019. Eiffel: Efficient and flexible software packet scheduling. In Proceedings of the USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI’19). 1732.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. [44] Schlinker Brandon, Kim Hyojeong, Cui Timothy, Katz-Bassett Ethan, Madhyastha Harsha V., Cunha Italo, Quinn James, Hasan Saif, Lapukhov Petr, and Zeng Hongyi. 2017. Engineering egress with edge fabric: Steering oceans of content to the world. In Proceedings of the Conference of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication. ACM, 418431.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. [45] Shenker Scott, Casado Martin, Koponen Teemu, McKeown Nick, et al. 2011. The future of networking, and the past of protocols. Open Netw. Summit 20 (2011), 130.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  46. [46] Shreedhar Madhavapeddi and Varghese George. 1996. Efficient fair queuing using deficit round-robin. IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw.3 (1996), 375385.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  47. [47] Shrivastav Vishal. 2019. Fast, scalable, and programmable packet scheduler in hardware. In Proceedings of the ACM Special Interest Group on Data Communication. ACM, 367379.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  48. [48] Sivaraman Anirudh, Cheung Alvin, Budiu Mihai, Kim Changhoon, Alizadeh Mohammad, Balakrishnan Hari, Varghese George, McKeown Nick, and Licking Steve. 2016. Packet transactions: High-level programming for line-rate switches. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Conference. ACM, 1528.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  49. [49] Sivaraman Anirudh, Subramanian Suvinay, Alizadeh Mohammad, Chole Sharad, Chuang Shang-Tse, Agrawal Anurag, Balakrishnan Hari, Edsall Tom, Katti Sachin, and McKeown Nick. 2016. Programmable packet scheduling at line rate. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Conference. ACM, 4457.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  50. [50] Szymanski Ted H. and Gilbert Dave. 2010. Provisioning mission-critical telerobotic control systems over internet backbone networks with essentially-perfect QoS. IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun. 28, 5 (2010), 630643.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  51. [51] Ðukić Vojislav, Jyothi Sangeetha Abdu, Karlaš Bojan, Owaida Muhsen, Zhang Ce, and Singla Ankit. 2019. Is advance knowledge of flow sizes a plausible assumption? In Proceedings of the 16th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI’19). 565580.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  52. [52] UNION IT. 2001. ITU-T G. 1010 Quality of Service and Performance. Geneva, Switzerland.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  53. [53] Wang Zheng and Crowcroft Jon. 1996. Quality-of-service routing for supporting multimedia applications. IEEE J. Select. Areas Commun. 14, 7 (1996), 12281234.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  54. [54] Xu Le, Venkataraman Shivaram, Gupta Indranil, Mai Luo, and Potharaju Rahul. 2021. Move fast and meet deadlines: Fine-grained real-time stream processing with cameo. In Proceedings of the 18th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI’21). 389405.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  55. [55] Yang Shujie, Xu Changqiao, Zhong Lujie, Shen Jiahao, and Muntean Gabriel-Miro. 2019. A QoE-driven multicast strategy with segment routing—A novel multimedia traffic engineering paradigm. IEEE Trans. Broadcast. 66, 1 (2019), 3446.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  56. [56] Yen Jin Y.. 1970. An algorithm for finding shortest routes from all source nodes to a given destination in general networks. Quart. Appl. Math. 27, 4 (1970), 526530.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  57. [57] Zhang Hong, Chen Li, Yi Bairen, Chen Kai, Chowdhury Mosharaf, and Geng Yanhui. 2016. CODA: Toward automatically identifying and scheduling coflows in the dark. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Conference. ACM, 160173.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  58. [58] Zhang Qi, Liu Jianhui, and Zhao Guodong. 2018. Towards 5G enabled tactile robotic telesurgery. arXiv:1803.03586. Retrieved from https://arxiv.org/abs/1803.03586.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  59. [59] Zhao Shuai, Sydney Ali, and Medhi Deep. 2016. Building application-aware network environments using SDN for optimizing Hadoop applications. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Conference. 583584.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  60. [60] Zilberman Noa, Bracha Gabi, and Schzukin Golan. 2019. Stardust: Divide and conquer in the data center network. In Proceedings of the 16th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI’19). 141160.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  61. [61] Zoo Topology. 2011. TATA. Retrieved January 28, 2020 from http://www.topology-zoo.org/maps/TataNld.jpg.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Tuneman: Customizing Networks to Guarantee Application Bandwidth and Latency

        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

        Full Access

        • Published in

          cover image ACM Transactions on Internet Technology
          ACM Transactions on Internet Technology  Volume 23, Issue 1
          February 2023
          564 pages
          ISSN:1533-5399
          EISSN:1557-6051
          DOI:10.1145/3584863
          • Editor:
          • Ling Liu
          Issue’s Table of Contents

          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: 23 February 2023
          • Online AM: 9 December 2022
          • Accepted: 21 September 2022
          • Revised: 5 August 2022
          • Received: 1 March 2022
          Published in toit Volume 23, Issue 1

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article
        • Article Metrics

          • Downloads (Last 12 months)319
          • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)34

          Other Metrics

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader

        Full Text

        View this article in Full Text.

        View Full Text

        HTML Format

        View this article in HTML Format .

        View HTML Format