Skip to main content

Analysis on the current and the future Internet structure regarding multi-homed and multi-path routing

Abstract

We analyzed how reliability will be improved by adopting inter-domain multi-path and multi-homing routing when the structure in the Internet changes. We identified the properties of the ideal network structure that will maximize the advantage of multi-path and multi-home routing using mathematical analyses. We focused on how each end-to-end path is built, how many multi-paths exist and how each multi-path consists of multi-path and multi-homing segments. Second, we analyzed the trends in the recent changes in how the Internet is structured from the view point of inter-domain multi-path routing. The mathematical analyses suggest that a large number of multi-paths or multi-homing is not necessary to effectively benefit from multi-path routing. However, it will be important to keep the path length short in the segments where multiple paths are not available. The analyses on the recent changes in the Internet structure suggest that multi-path routing will contribute to improvement of reliability in two different ways. For the autonomous systems away from the Internet core, multi-path routing will improve the reliability by going around the busy Internet core, while it will improve the reliability by distributing network traffic load through the Internet core for the autonomous systems close to the core.

References

  1. 1.

    The Cooperative Association for Internet Data Analysis project, URL: http://as-rank.caida.org (last accessed: February 20, 2011)

  2. 2.

    Chang H, Jamin S, Willinger W (2006) To peer or not to peer: modeling the evolution of the Internet’s AS-level topology. In: Proceedings of the twenty-fifth IEEE international conference on computer communications (INFOCOM), pp 1–12

    Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Faloutsos C, Faloutsos P, Faloutsos M (1999) On power-law relationships of the Internet topology. In: Proceedings of ACM special interest group on data communications (SIGCOMM), pp 251–262

    Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Fujinoki H (2009) Improving reliability for multi-home inbound traffic: MHLB/I packet-level inter-domain load-balancing. In: Proceedings of the forth international conference on availability, reliability and security (ARES), pp 248–256

    Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Gao L (2001) On inferring autonomous system relationships in the Internet. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw 9(6):733–745

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Ge Z, Figueiredo DR, Jaiwal S, Gao L (2001) On the hierarchical structure of the logical Internet graph. In: Proceedings of SPIE information technologies and communications, pp 208–222

    Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Goldenberg D, Qiuy L, Xie H, Yang R, Zhang Y (2004) Optimizing cost and performance for multihoming. Comput Commun Rev 34(4):79–92

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Griffin T, Premore B (2001) An experimental analysis of BGP convergence time. In: Proceedings of the ninth IEEE international conference on network protocols, p 53

    Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Gummadi R, Govindan R (2005) Practical routing-layer support for scalable multihoming. In: Proceedings of the twenty-forth IEEE international conference on computer communications (INFOCOM), pp 248–259

    Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Guo F, Chen J, Li W, Chiueh T (2004) Experiences in building a multihoming load balancing system. In: Proceedings of the twenty-third IEEE international conference on computer communications (INFOCOM), pp 1241–1251

    Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Huston G (2001) Analyzing the Internet BGP routing table. Internet Protoc J 4(1):25

    Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Cable National, Telecommunication Association URL http://www.ncta.com (last accessed: February 20, 2011)

  13. 13.

    Norton W (2005) The Evolution of the U.S. Internet peering ecosystem. Presented at North American Network Operators’ Group Conference, URL: http://drpeering.net/white-papers/Ecosystems/Evolution-of-the-U.S.-Peering-Ecosystem.html, lat accessed: August 29, 2010

  14. 14.

    Oliveira R, Pei D, Willinger W, Zhnag B, Zhang L (2008) In search of the elusive ground truth: the Internet’s AS-level connectivity structure. ACM SIGMETRICS Perform Eval Rev 36(1):217–228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Oliveira R, Zhnag B, Zhang L (2007) Observing the evolution of AS topology. Comput Commun Rev 37(4):313–324

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Paxson V (1997) End-to-end routing behavior in the Internet. IEEE/ACM Trans Netw 5(5):601–615

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Rekhter Y, Li T (2006) A border gateway protocol 4 (BGP-4). Request for comments 4271

  18. 18.

    Shakkottai S, Fomenkov M, Koga R, Krioukov D, Claffy K (2009) Evolution of the Internet AS-level ecosystem. In: Proceedings of the first international conference on complex sciences: theory and applications, pp 1605–1616

    Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Subramanian L, Agarwal S, Rexford J, Katz R (2002) Characterizing the Internet hierarchy from multiple vantage points. In: Proceedings of the twenty-first IEEE international conference on computer communications (INFOCOM), pp 618–627

    Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    University of Oregon Route Views Project, URL: http://www.routeviews.org/ (last accessed: August 29, 2010)

  21. 21.

    Xia J, Gaon L (2004) On the evaluation of AS relationship inferences. In: Proceedings of the twenty-third IEEE international conference on computer communications (INFOCOM), pp 1373–1377

    Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Yannuzzi M, Masip-Bruin X (2005) Open issues in interdomain routing: a survey. IEEE Netw 49–56

  23. 23.

    Zhang B, Liu E, Massey DD, Zhang L (2005) Collecting the Internet AS-level topology. Comput Commun Rev 35(1):53–61

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hiroshi Fujinoki.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fujinoki, H., Hauck, A. Analysis on the current and the future Internet structure regarding multi-homed and multi-path routing. J Internet Serv Appl 2, 257–270 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13174-011-0039-6

Download citation

Keywords

  • Multi-path routing
  • Multi-homing
  • Inter-domain routing
  • Reliability
  • Internet routing
  • Border gateway routing protocol