logging in or signing up IPAM concluding workshop Tarzen Download Post to : URL : Related Presentations : Share Add to Flag Embed Email Send to Blogs and Networks Add to Channel Uploaded from authorPOINT Insert YouTube videos in PowerPont slides with aS Desktop Copy embed code: (To copy code, click on the text box) Embed: URL: Thumbnail: WordPress Embed Customize Embed The presentation is successfully added In Your Favorites. Views: 189 Category: News & Reports.. License: All Rights Reserved Like it (0) Dislike it (0) Added: June 19, 2007 This Presentation is Public Favorites: 0 Presentation Description No description available. Comments Posting comment... Premium member Presentation Transcript New Directions and Half-Baked Ideas in Topology Modeling: New Directions and Half-Baked Ideas in Topology Modeling Ellen W. Zegura College of Computing Georgia Tech Outline: Outline A very little bit of background Thoughts on: Alternative Internet models Scaling Application-driven topology modeling Networking background: Networking background access networks hosts/endsystems routers domains/autonomous systems exchange point stub domains transit domains border routers peering lowly worm Topo modeling: state-of-the-art: Topo modeling: state-of-the-art Graph representation Router-level modeling vertices are routers edges are one-hop IP connectivity Domain- (AS-) level modeling vertices are domains (ASes) edges are peering relationships Mostly undirected and unlabeled graphs Alternative Internet models: Alternative Internet models Intermediate AS/router level model explicit representation for 'important' routers (border routers and exchange points) Hybrid real/synthetic model Fluid-flow topology model what might this mean? alternatives to graph-based models? 1: Intermediate AS/router level: 1: Intermediate AS/router level exchange point stub domains transit domains border routers one super-vertex per domain one vertex per exchange point and border router explicit representation of border routers endpoints of edges are border routers or exchange points 2: Hybrid real/synthetic model: 2: Hybrid real/synthetic model Create database of real data for autonomous system topology Use synthetic model for high-level structure Populate synthetic model using real data stub domains transit domains transit stub III: “Fluid-flow” topology model: III: 'Fluid-flow' topology model What does this mean? alternatives to graph-based models Example: ASes occupy 2-d space; overlapping ASes can exchange traffic Scaling: Scaling Problem: what are the smallest topology models that capture the interesting properties? One approach: canonical topologies with a size parameter (Too) simple examples: ring, star, trees, parking lot, … Possible models: Possible models Domain star: One router per stub domain One transit domain One transit router per stub domain (or per k stub domains) Possible models: Possible models Domain single bottleneck: bottleneck between xit domains different distances between stub domains What else?: What else? More transit domains Hierarchy in transit domains More multihoming (stub domain connected to more than one transit domain) Routing rules? Closer look at needs of applications Application-driven models: Application-driven models Rather than designing general models, let’s think about what particular problems need Examples: BGP analysis peer-to-peer (or overlay) system design BGP analysis: BGP analysis BGP – interdomain routing protocol external BGP – between domains internal BGP – within a domain BGP problems: stability (do the routes oscillate?) convergence time what are the modeling needs? topology plus peering policies for stability: worst case topologies for convergence: typical topologies? Peer-to-peer/overlay networks: Peer-to-peer/overlay networks Endsystems in base network are overlay network nodes; paths in base network are overlay network links Overlay problems: quality of overlay (length of overlay paths, load on base links,…) what are the modeling needs? AS-level alone is sufficient? intermediate AS/router-level is better? More questions: More questions What topology models are appropriate for wireless/ad-hoc/sensor networks? What additional information is useful besides basic topology? Can a focus on the use of models lead to improved ability to evaluate the quality of models? How much do you need to know about today’s Internet to design decent models? You do not have the permission to view this presentation. In order to view it, please contact the author of the presentation.
IPAM concluding workshop Tarzen Download Post to : URL : Related Presentations : Share Add to Flag Embed Email Send to Blogs and Networks Add to Channel Uploaded from authorPOINT Insert YouTube videos in PowerPont slides with aS Desktop Copy embed code: (To copy code, click on the text box) Embed: URL: Thumbnail: WordPress Embed Customize Embed The presentation is successfully added In Your Favorites. Views: 189 Category: News & Reports.. License: All Rights Reserved Like it (0) Dislike it (0) Added: June 19, 2007 This Presentation is Public Favorites: 0 Presentation Description No description available. Comments Posting comment... Premium member Presentation Transcript New Directions and Half-Baked Ideas in Topology Modeling: New Directions and Half-Baked Ideas in Topology Modeling Ellen W. Zegura College of Computing Georgia Tech Outline: Outline A very little bit of background Thoughts on: Alternative Internet models Scaling Application-driven topology modeling Networking background: Networking background access networks hosts/endsystems routers domains/autonomous systems exchange point stub domains transit domains border routers peering lowly worm Topo modeling: state-of-the-art: Topo modeling: state-of-the-art Graph representation Router-level modeling vertices are routers edges are one-hop IP connectivity Domain- (AS-) level modeling vertices are domains (ASes) edges are peering relationships Mostly undirected and unlabeled graphs Alternative Internet models: Alternative Internet models Intermediate AS/router level model explicit representation for 'important' routers (border routers and exchange points) Hybrid real/synthetic model Fluid-flow topology model what might this mean? alternatives to graph-based models? 1: Intermediate AS/router level: 1: Intermediate AS/router level exchange point stub domains transit domains border routers one super-vertex per domain one vertex per exchange point and border router explicit representation of border routers endpoints of edges are border routers or exchange points 2: Hybrid real/synthetic model: 2: Hybrid real/synthetic model Create database of real data for autonomous system topology Use synthetic model for high-level structure Populate synthetic model using real data stub domains transit domains transit stub III: “Fluid-flow” topology model: III: 'Fluid-flow' topology model What does this mean? alternatives to graph-based models Example: ASes occupy 2-d space; overlapping ASes can exchange traffic Scaling: Scaling Problem: what are the smallest topology models that capture the interesting properties? One approach: canonical topologies with a size parameter (Too) simple examples: ring, star, trees, parking lot, … Possible models: Possible models Domain star: One router per stub domain One transit domain One transit router per stub domain (or per k stub domains) Possible models: Possible models Domain single bottleneck: bottleneck between xit domains different distances between stub domains What else?: What else? More transit domains Hierarchy in transit domains More multihoming (stub domain connected to more than one transit domain) Routing rules? Closer look at needs of applications Application-driven models: Application-driven models Rather than designing general models, let’s think about what particular problems need Examples: BGP analysis peer-to-peer (or overlay) system design BGP analysis: BGP analysis BGP – interdomain routing protocol external BGP – between domains internal BGP – within a domain BGP problems: stability (do the routes oscillate?) convergence time what are the modeling needs? topology plus peering policies for stability: worst case topologies for convergence: typical topologies? Peer-to-peer/overlay networks: Peer-to-peer/overlay networks Endsystems in base network are overlay network nodes; paths in base network are overlay network links Overlay problems: quality of overlay (length of overlay paths, load on base links,…) what are the modeling needs? AS-level alone is sufficient? intermediate AS/router-level is better? More questions: More questions What topology models are appropriate for wireless/ad-hoc/sensor networks? What additional information is useful besides basic topology? Can a focus on the use of models lead to improved ability to evaluate the quality of models? How much do you need to know about today’s Internet to design decent models?