Optimizing Data Plane Resources for Multipath Flows

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET) e-ISSN: 2395 -0056
Volume: 04 Issue: 05 | May -2017 www.irjet.net p-ISSN: 2395-0072
© 2017, IRJET | Impact Factor value: 5.181 | ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal | Page 1204
Optimizing Data Plane Resources for Multipath Flows
Shruti Sankari1, A.S.Jadhav2,
1Student, ECE dept, BLDEA college, Karnataka, India
2Assistant professor, ECE dept, BLDEA college, Karnataka, India
---------------------------------------------------------------------***---------------------------------------------------------------------
Abstract - In numerous advanced network systems such as
data centres, optical networks and multiprotocol label
switching (MPLS), with an undeniable bandwidthrequestover
an isolated mesh passage; the remittance of a congestion flow
is either unendurable or too exorbitant. In such cases the
network’s bandwidth utilization is possible to enhance by
dividing the traffic flow over numerous efficient track. For the
identical congestion flow if multiple paths are employed it in-
turn improves the effectiveness of the network. It therefore
acquires high-priced accelerating resources fromthenetwork
junction such as wavelengths/light paths of optical networks,
the entries of Ethernet which is TCAM /MPLS switches. A lotof
difficulties relating to dividing a congestion flow over
numerous paths and the problemofreducingacceleratingcost
are defined in two cases such as RMO and DMO. The
forwarding cost for both the problems is minimized by
measuring the number of tracks and the number of junctions
traced by the corresponding paths with the help of efficient
algorithms.
Key Words: Multipath flows, optical networks, routing
1. INTRODUCTION
In computer networks, a traffic flow is defined as allocating
the identical source and destination mesh nodes by
cascading a series of data packets. With the extraction of
details from the parcel header, for example, the locations of
IP/MAC, the fields of the port in the UDP/TCP header, or the
VLAN number, a congestion flow can be divided in to
multiple traffic sub flows [1]. It then becomes feasible to
forward each of them over a separate network track since
these traffic sub flows have been resulted from distinct
implementations, or sometimes even by non-identical hosts.
When forwarding traffic flow over an isolated track is
unendurable or too exorbitant then considering numerous
paths for a congestion flow will be beneficial.
An example to outline the need of multipath steering is
shown in Fig 1.1
Fig 1.1 Simple example of a multipath flow
So as to forward a 2-Gb/s blockage spill out of a to f,
considering the default way as a→b→f, it has just 1 Gb/s
open transmission capacity, and the one which is drawn out
has 1.5 Gb/s available data transfer capacity. For this run of
the mill case the clog stream is isolated such that 1 Gb/s will
be sent over the top most way and 1 Gb/s over the base way.
An extra “forwarding resources” are being consumed from
the network nodes while bifurcating a traffic flow over
numerous tracks [2]. These assets are relative to the
quantity of tracks and the quantity of
intersections/connectionsconsulted bythecomparingways.
2. PROPOSED SYSTEM
In order to reduce forwarding cost and to improve
bandwidth utilization of traffic flow scheme, the difficulty in
cutting down the accelerating cost is discussed in two
distinct cases.
For the main case, called Decomposition with Minimum
Overhead (DMO), here the congestion requirement
comprising of source, destination, and bandwidth request
are given as well as a meshwork flow that fulfils the transfer
speed request between the source and goal hubs is likewise
given [3]. Before proceeding, the network flowhastobefirst
predetermined through bandwidth effectiveness rule, for
example, transfer speed cost and thus the congestion flow
can be split into paths that are simple to form tosetmid-way
the source and goal hubs while decreasing the quantity of
tracks or the quantity of intersections they travel across.

For the second case, called Routing withMinimumOverhead
(RMO), here just a blockage prerequisite involving source,
goal and transmission capacity demand is given [3] and
paths that are simple to form a set are found mid-way the
source and goal hubs over which the data transmission
demand can be passed on while decreasing the quantity of
tracks or the quantity of intersection they travel across.
Along these lines two sets of issues will be settled:
 RMO (p) and DMO (p) to prune the number of ways.
 RMO (n) and DMO (n) to prune thequantityofhubs.
2.1 DMO VERSUS RMO
DMO and RMO are shown in Fig 2.1 In this example let the
cost of each link be 1 for the sake of simple analysis
Fig 2.1 Two optimization problems considered to
accommodate an 8Mb/s congestion flow from vertex a to
vertex c
(a) Meshwork with open data transfer capacity on each
connection.
(b) Slightest arrangement of way (cost of stream =48)
(c) Minimal stream of cost-system (cost = 36).
(d) Breaking down the negligible cost stream into a less
number of tracks.
In Fig. 2.1(a) there is a network with an accessible
bandwidth which is a capacity of each link. Initially the
operator wishes to receive a 1 Gb/s congestionrequestfrom
the node a to c with a bandwidth cost of 2 [1]. However it is
the cheapest and can be transported with a distinct path.
Between similar nodes in the event that the controllerneeds
to get a 8 Gb/s movement ask for, a smallest track will notbe
able to carry it. The manipulatorcanthenusethiscongestion
request as an input to RMO if the main optimizationaspect is
to reduce the accelerating cost.
In Fig. 2.1(b)it illustrates forwarding of the congestion
request over two different paths which are of 4 Gb/s each:
and
thiskeyideareduces
both the number of tracks which are counted to be two and
the number of junctions that carry the flow:6+8=14, with a
bandwidth cost of 4*5+4*7=48.
In Fig. 2.1(c) it illustrates an output determined by an
operator employing a standard calculation for deciding a
stream of minimum cost organize [1]. Presently if the
administrator's principle advancement perspective is to
decrease the data transfer capacity taken a toll in
transporting 8 Gb/s from hub a to hub c, the administrator
can consider the standard calculation. For this system
stream the cost of data transmission will be 36.
In Fig. 2.1(d) it illustrates the network in which the network
shown in Fig. 2.1(c) acts as a contribution to DMO to Detroit
it into an arrangement of tracks by a manipulator in orderto
reduce the accelerating cost. Thus the fig 2.1(d) illustrates
the deterioration of the network flow which reduces both
the number of tracks which are counted to be four and the
number of junctions carrying the corresponding paths (22).
2.2 SYSTEM DESIGN
Fig 2.2 Architecture for proposed system

Fig 2.2 shows that dividing a congestionflowovernumerous
tracks takes additional accelerating resources. These
resources are related to number of tracks and also to the
number of nodes, so that the traffic demand is used as an
input to RMO by the source resulting in a solution that
reduces both the number of tracksandthenodesresultingin
higher bandwidth cost [4]. As the bandwidth cost will be
high it is necessary to find the minimum cost network flow
and this network flow along with the traffic demandactsasa
contribution to DMO to Detroit it into ways which shape a
set to decrease the quickening cost.
The performance of both DMO and RMO are compared, this
comparison lets us to better understand the tradeoff
between bandwidth effectiveness and accelerating cost.The
comparison thus permits one to recognize an algorithmthat
gives the best presentation for both aspects.
Table 2.1 Description of the problems to tackle
The above table summarizes the four addressed problems;
where in the following contributions are made:
 Initially RMO (n) and DMO (n) issues are defined
and solved, these problems are presented with
approximation algorithms with performance
guarantees.
 The basic ravenous decay calculation for DMO has
an estimation proportion that is autonomous of the
extent of the system.
 Finally the execution of the RMO and DMO are
compared, with this comparison it makes it better
to understand the trade off between transfer speed
productivity and sending cost. One can recognize a
calculation that has the best execution for both
destinations once the comparisoniscompletedone.
Table 2.2 Computation Complexity Results
The above table summarizes main results fromcomputation
complexity perspective where, the bandwidth request is
indicated by B, and the quantum of the edge capacities is
indicated by b, α is tuning factor, the value of optimal
explication is opt. The resulting services are implementable
to whatever other transmission capacity control paradigm,
for example, expanding the throughput or diminishing the
greatest load.
3. SIMULATION RESULTS AND ANALYSIS
It deals with the evaluation of the interpretationsoftheRMO
and DMO algorithms. The representations of the two
adaptations i.e., RMO (p) and RMO (n) of the RMO
Algorithms are first examined. By differentiating the
productions of both RMO and DMO algorithms the trade off
intervening the transmission capacity cost and the
quickening expense of a stream of system has to be
evaluated as they appeal to a flow of network with smallest
cost of bandwidth.
In order to replicate network arena simulation study based
on the “preferential attachment model” the BRITEsimulator
has to be used. A bandwidth demand has to be generated
between a source and a destination for each topology. For
each setting it is mandatory to describe the methods to
choose bandwidth demand and the characteristics of the
simulated topologies. However, one simulation instance is
comprised of a network topology together witha bandwidth
demand. For each such instance various algorithms have to
be applied.
3.1Reducing the number of tracks
As shown in Fig 3.1 it illustrates the necessary bandwidth
that can be delivered based upon the bandwidth request

over the number of paths. Fig 3.1(a) showsa network having
100 nodes with a mean value as 5 links and Fig 3.1(b) is a
network having 100 nodes with a mean value as 10 links.
The capacities of the edge have to be spread evenly in the
range [0.5 C, 1.5C] for each and every network, where C is
the normalizing parameter for the edge limits and for the
volume of data transmission demands [2]. The y-hubspeaks
to the quantity of Deterioting ways produced by different
calculations. The standardizeddata transfercapacityrequest
from s to t is spoken to by x-hub, where the standardized
transmission capacity is characterized as the data transfer
capacity ask for isolated by the estimation of the most
elevated stream of system between any match of
intersections in the system.
Fig 3.1(a) 100 nodes with mean degree =5 links.
Fig 3.1(b) 100 nodes with mean degree =10 links.
Fig .3.1 Algorithm finds the number of paths with various
methods based on the normalized bandwidth request for
different dimensions of network arena.
3.2 Reducing the number of junctions.
In this section, the presentation of Algorithm has to be
examined in which , the main goal is to reduce thenumber of
nodes travelled by each and every path that would transmit
the required bandwidth based on thebandwidthrequestfor
the network arena identical to those taken into
consideration in Fig 3.1. As described in Fig 3.1 it becomes
easy to generate the network instances and bandwidth
requirements.
It is proved that when Algorithm considers WID/LEN for
determining an initial flow of network, it gives the best
performance. S-WIDEyieldsresultswithapproximately20%
more number of nodes when compared to WID/LEN, where
in the S-WIDE was assumed to produce the minimum
number of paths [3].
Hence it is approximated to preferablyreducethenumber of
nodes by choosing the smaller paths over broader ones,
although these results lead in rising the number of tracks,
this is considered as the benefit of WID/LEN over S-WIDE.
The services of WIDE, which provide the worstperformance
in turn, support this approach.
ECMP possesses the curve of worstperformanceasshown in
Fig 3.1, where as in Fig 3.2 its performance is quiet good. A
typical comparison of the ECMP curves from Fig 3.1 and Fig
3.2 describes that smaller paths preferably reduce the
number of junctions than broader ones.
Fig 3.2 (a) 100 nodes with mean degree = 5 links

Fig 3.2 (b) 100 nodes with mean degree = 10 links
Fig 3.2 Algorithm finds the number of paths with various
methods based on the normalized bandwidth request for
different dimensions of network arena.
3.3 Trade off between bandwidth rate and
accelerating cost.
The intermediary trade off for the bandwidth rate and
accelerating cost has to be studied, to evaluate these three
factors have to be taken into consideration:
1) when the leading objective is reducing the bandwidth
rate, the additional accelerating cost has to be found.
2) when the leading objective is reducing the accelerating
cost, the additional bandwidth rate has to be found.
3) with respect to this trade off the performance of various
procedures have to be noted down.
The well known Edmonds – karp algorithm is employed to
determine the least – cost organize stream by and large
systems. COST is one of the technique in which this
calculation iteratively totals up to the officially assembled
stream of system for the minimum-cost path till the
bandwidth request is confirmed [4]. An identical cost is
assigned to every flow of unit on each link using the same
replicable results as described before. The transmission
capacity cost is then dictated by including the cost of every
single individual connection. Fig 3.3 (a) and (b) portrays the
exchange off between the data transfer capacity rateandthe
quantity of divided ways. The x-hub indicates the
transmission capacity rate standardizedbytheestimationof
the genuine transfer speed asks. The y –axis signifies add up
to number of divided ways. The explanations are assessed
for systems having 100 hubs with mean hub degree as 5 or
10. The key solutions are analyzed for a normalized
bandwidth request of 0.6.
Fig 3.3 (a) 100 nodes with mean degree =5
Fig 3.3 (b) 100 nodes with mean degree =10
Fig 3.3 Exchange off between the data transfer capacity rate
and the quantity of ways that convey the relating
transmission capacity
Fig 3.3 (c) 100 nodes with mean degree =5

Fig3.3 (d) 100 nodes with mean degree =10
Fig 3.3 Exchange off between the transferspeed rateand the
quantity of hubs that convey the comparing data transfer
capacity
As expected from the above graphs the bandwidth cost is
minimized by COST, producing more number of paths. So
best one to minimize the number of paths is S-WIDE but its
bandwidth cost is approximated to be 50% more when
compared to COST. Therefore looking into Fig3.3(a)and(b)
it can be dissolved that an expected tradeoff between the
two extremes is yielded by WID/LEN because, relatively it
has 5% more paths when compared to S-WIDE and the cost
of bandwidth is 10% more than that of COST which is
manageable.
The exchange off between the transferspeedrateofa stream
of system and the aggregate number of hubs that transmit
the stream is portrayed in the Fig 3.3 (c) and (d). Here again
for this situation, WID/LEN gives the best exchange off
between transfer speed rate and quickening cost.
4. CONCLUSIONS
In computer networks, in order to forwarda congestionflow
over an individual path it becomes unendurable or too
exorbitant so using multiple paths for a congestion flow will
be functional. However it increases the forwarding cost as it
gobbles high-priced forwarding resources, where in these
resources are proportionate to the number of tracks as well
as to the number of junctions. Hence it is essential to divide
the traffic flow over numerous paths. To enhance the
bandwidth requirement, it is many times advantageous to
divide traffic into several paths by reducing the associated
forwarding cost Disintegration with least sending overhead
(DMO) and Routing with least sending overhead (RMO) are
the two optimization problemsthatresultwhena trafficflow
has to divided. It is shown where in both the issues are NP-
hard and an estimate calculations have to be proposed. For
RMO an efficient practical heuristics are presented. First an
initial network flow is found by theseheuristicsandthenitis
decomposed using the DMO approximation. It is manifested
that the methodology in choosing the beginning of flow of
network will have a censorious effect on the presentation of
the algorithm. WID/LEN is proved to give the best tradeoff
between the bandwidth rate and routing overhead.
5 .FUTURE SCOPE
The fundamental goal is to part the system activity stream
offering ascend to an arrangement of great ways between
the host and target hubs. In decreasing the quantity of ways
and additionally the quantity of hubs they traverse it
likewise intends to decide an arrangement of great ways
between the host and target hubs over which the data
transmission demand can be passed on. In future it can be
extended with the introduction of a procedure for clarifying
highly allocated denial-of-service attacks. It desires to lock a
thousand of unwanted flows, allowing few hundred filters
which would be functional. It thus avoids malignant nodes
attempting to disturb the communication of rest of the
nodes. Even before they can occur, multipath flow has the
ability to block undesired flows from the identical host
coming through different paths. The attacks are thus
overcome by the process. Thus its focus is on discharging or
taking off all data packets, and all ACK packets passing is
controlled by the proposed model.
6. REFERENCES
1. R. Banner and A. Orda,”Efficient multipath-routing
schemes for congestion minimization, ”Technion –
Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel, Tech.
rep., 2014
2. Hartman, T., A. Hassidim and H. Kalpan, 2012. How
to split a flow , in proc, IEEE INFOCOM, 2012
pp:828-836
3. Handley, M., A. Greenhalgh and D. Wischik 2011.
Improving datacenter performance and robustness
with multipath TCP.
4. R. Cohen, L. Lewin-Eytan, J. S. naor, and D. Raz, “On
the effect of forwarding table size on SDN network
utilization,” in IEEE INFOCOM 2014-IEEE
conference on computer communications, 2014.

Optimizing Data Plane Resources for Multipath Flows

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Similar to Optimizing Data Plane Resources for Multipath Flows

Similar to Optimizing Data Plane Resources for Multipath Flows (20)

More from IRJET Journal

More from IRJET Journal (20)

Recently uploaded

Recently uploaded (20)

Optimizing Data Plane Resources for Multipath Flows