Self-Interested Routing In

Online Environments
1
Abstract
A recent trend in routing research is to avoid
inefciencies in network-level routing by allowing hosts to
either choose routes themselves (e.g., source routing) or use
overlay routing networks (e.g., Detour or RO). !uch
a""roaches result in sel#sh routing, because routing decisions
are no longer based on system-wide criteria but are instead
designed to o"timi$e host-based or overlay-based metrics. A
series o% theoretical results showing that sel#sh routing can
result in subo"timal system behavior have cast doubts on this
a""roach. &n this "a"er, we use a game-theoretic a""roach to
investigate the "er%ormance o% sel#sh routing in &nternet-like
environments based on realistic to"ologies and trafc
demands in our simulations. 'e show that in contrast to
theoretical worst cases, sel#sh routing achieves close to
o"timal average latency in such environments. (owever, such
"er%ormance bene#ts come at the e)"ense o% signi#cantly
increased congestion on certain links. *oreover, the ada"tive
nature o% sel#sh overlays can signi#cantly reduce the
e+ectiveness o% trafc engineering by making network trafc
less "redictable.
2
INTRODUCTION
About Selfs Routing
!OR decades, it has been the res"onsibility o% the network to
route trafc. Recent studies have shown that there is inherent
inefciency in network-level routing %rom the user,s "ers"ective. &n
res"onse to these observations, we have seen an emergent trend to
allow end hosts to choose routes themselves by using either source
routing or overlay routing -hese end-to-end route selection schemes
are shown to be e+ective in addressing some de#ciencies in today,s
&. routing. /or e)am"le, measurements %rom the Detour "ro0ect
show that in the &nternet, a large "ercentage o% 1ows can #nd better
alternative "aths by relaying among overlay nodes, thereby
im"roving their "er%ormance. Also demonstrates the bene#ts o%
overlay routing using real im"lementation and de"loyment. !uch
end-to-end route selection schemes are sel#sh by nature in that
they allow end users to greedily select routes to o"timi$e their own
"er%ormance without considering the systemwide criteria. Recent
theoretical results suggest that in the worst case sel#sh routing can
result in serious "er%ormance degradation due to lack o%
coo"eration. &n "articular, Roughgarden and -ardos "rove that the
price of anarchy (i.e., the worst-case ratio between the total latency
o% sel#sh routing and that o% the global o"timal) %or sel#sh routing
can be unbounded %or general latency %unctions. Des"ite much
theoretical advance, an o"en 2uestion is how sel#sh routing
"er%orms in &nternet-like environments. -his is a challenging
3
2uestion because today,s &nternet is uni2ue in the %ollowing
res"ects.
/irst, to"ologies and trafc demands o% the &nternet are not
arbitrary but have certain structures. -he worst-case results may
not be a""licable to realistic to"ologies and trafc demands. Ab
general o"en 2uestion is whether selfsh routing results in poor
performance in Internet-like environments (i.e., under realistic
network topologies and trafc demands). !econd, users in overlay
networks do not have %ull 1e)ibility in s"eci%ying their end-to-end
"aths. Due to limited availability o% source routing su""ort in the
routers, the "ath between any two network nodes is dictated by the
&nternet routing "rotocols, such as O!./, *.3!, or 45.. 'hile
overlay networks "rovide another mechanism to enable users to
control their routes by relaying through overlay nodes, the route
between two overlay nodes is still governed by the underlying
routing "rotocol. A natural 2uestion is how to model such selfsh
overlay routing and whether selfsh overlay routing results in poor
performance.
-hird, even i% sel#sh overlays (i.e., overlays consisting o%
sel#sh trafc) yield good "er%ormance, they can be de"loyed only
incrementally. As a result, background trafc and overlay trafc will
interact with each other. 'e call such interactions horizontal
interactions. An im"ortant 2uestion is how such selfsh trafc afects
the remaining trafc routed using the
traditional routing protocols. A related 2uestion is whether multiple
overlays result in poor performance. /ourth, the way in which sel#sh
users choose their routes can interact with trafc engineering. 'e
call such interactions vertical interactions, which can be viewed as
the %ollowing iterative "rocess. /irst, &nternet !ervice .roviders (&!.s)
ad0ust network-level routing according to trafc demands, using
schemes to minimi$e network cost. -hen sel#sh users ada"t to
changes in the underlying de%ault routes by choosing di+erent
overlay "aths to o"timi$e their end-to-end "er%ormance. !uch
4
ada"tation changes trafc demands and triggers trafc engineering
to read0ust the de%ault routes, which in turn makes sel#sh users
ada"t to new routes. 5iven the mismatch between the ob0ectives o%
sel#sh routing and trafc engineering, an interesting 2uestion is
whether selfsh routing interacts poorly with trafc engineering.
&n this "a"er, we seek to answer the above 2uestions through
e)tensive simulations. 'e take a game-theoretic a""roach to
com"ute the trafc e2uilibria o% various routing schemes and then
evaluate their "er%ormance. 'e %ocus on intra-domain network
environments because recent advances in to"ology ma""ing and
trafc estimation allow us to use realistic network to"ologies and
trafc demands %or such scenarios. 6nderstanding sel#sh routing in
inter-domain environments is also o% great interest but is more
challenging. /irst, we do not have realistic models %or inter-domain
trafc demands. !econd, des"ite some recent "rogress towards
understanding autonomous system relationshi"s more research
e+orts are needed to develo" realistic models %or inter-domain
routing "olicies. /inally, the large si$e o% inter-domain to"ologies
makes it com"utationally "rohibitive to derive trafc e2uilibria. Due
to these difculties, in this "a"er we conduct a "reliminary
investigation o% sel#sh routing in inter-domain environments. 'e
leave a more thorough study o% sel#sh routing in inter-domain
environments (e.g., considering a larger-scale network with di+erent
ty"es o% routing "olicies and realistic trafc demands) as %uture
work.
"enefts of Selfs Routing#
-he various bene#ts o% using !el#sh Routing are listed below,
-his routing is used to reduce to the latency
&t increase the through"uts in network
ot cost oriented.
Reduced administrative costs.
3ower error rates.
5
&ncreased .roductivity.
4etter services to clients.
S$STE% ANA&$SIS
E'ISTIN( S$STE%#
-he e)isting network level routing is used to send
the "ackets %rom source to destination through router. -he
router which maintain the routing table and search the
destination address in routing table i% the destinations address
available then the router send the "ackets to destination or
else it send the "ackets to nearest router.
&n network level routing,
etwork in charge o% routing.
Route selection a+ects user "er%ormance.
&t yields sub-o"timal user "er%ormance.

6
&imitations
7 etwork level routing is subo"timal %or user "er%ormance
8 Routing hierarchy.
8 .olicy routing.
8 92ui"ment %ailure and transient instability.
8 !low reaction (i% any) to network congestion.
)RO)OSED S$STE%#
&n the "ro"osed sel#sh routing, the end users "ick their
own routing "ath to send the "ackets %rom source to
destination. -here are two ty"es o% sel#sh routing, they are
Selfs source routing *e+g+, Nimrod-+
Selfs overla. routing *e+g+, Detour-+
7 !el#sh nature
8 9nd hosts or routing overlays greedily select routes.
8 O"timi$e their own "er%ormance goals 8 ot
considering system-wide criteria.
7 !tudies based on small scale de"loyment show it im"roves
"er%ormance.
Selfs source routing#
&t results in sel#sh routing, since the source o% the trafc
makes an inde"endent decision about how the trafc should
be routed. -he source can directly choose the route "ath.
7
Selfs overla. routing#
&t is similar to source routing the trafc source that
controls the routes. -he end users o%ten have com"lete
routing control that is source itsel% have maintained the
routing table and send the "ackets %rom source to destination.
)RO"&E% !OR%U&ATION
A number o% recent studies have re"orted that network-level
routing is inefcient %rom the user,s "ers"ective. /or e)am"le,
!avage et aluse &nternet measurements to show that the de%ault
routing "ath is o%ten subo"timal in terms o% latency, loss rate, and
-:. through"ut. -he subo"timal "er%ormance o% network- level
routing is inevitable due to routing hierarchy and "olicy as well as
di+erent routing ob0ectives used by network o"erators, whose goal
is to avoid high utili$ation. *oreover, stability "roblems with routing
"rotocols, such as 45., could make things even worse. As a result,
8
there has been a movement to give users more autonomy in
choosing their routes by using source routing or overlay routing
networks
Ob/ectives
-he %ollowing are the ob0ectives o% the !el#sh Routing,
-o evaluate the "er%ormance o% sel#sh routing based on realistic
to"ologies and trafc demands.
!uch "er%ormance bene#ts come at the e)"ense o% signi#cantly
increased congestion.
0ARD1ARE S)ECI!ICATION
)rocessor ; Any .rocessor above <== *h$.
Ram ; >?@*b.
0ard Dis2 ; >= 5b.
Com3act Dis2 ; A<= *b.
In3ut device ; !tandard Beyboard and *ouse.
Out3ut device ; C5A and (igh Resolution *onitor.
SO!T1ARE S)ECI!ICATION
O3erating S.stem ; 'indows ?=== server /amily.
Tecni4ues ; DDB >.<
9
Data "ases ; *icroso%t Access
E5ternal Tool ; D/ree :hart
10