GET IEEE BIG DATA,JAVA ,DOTNET,ANDROID ,NS2,MATLAB,EMBEDED AT LOW COST WITH BEST QUALITY PLEASE CONTACT BELOW NUMBER FOR MORE INFORMATION PLEASE FIND THE BELOW DETAILS: Nexgen Technology No :66,4th cross,Venkata nagar, Near SBI ATM, Puducherry. Email Id: praveen@nexgenproject.com Mobile: 9791938249 Telephone: 0413-2211159 www.nexgenproject.com

1. CONTACT: PRAVEEN KUMAR. L (,+91 – 9791938249)
MAIL ID: , praveen@nexgenproject.com
Web: www.nexgenproject.com,
AN OVERLAY ARCHITECTURE FOR THROUGHPUTOPTIMAL
MULTIPATH ROUTING
ABSTRACT
Legacy networks are often designed to operate withsimple single-path routing, like the
shortest path, which is knownto be throughput suboptimal. On the other hand,
previouslyproposed throughput optimal policies (i.e., backpressure) requireevery device in
the network to make dynamic routing decisions.In this paper, we study an overlay
architecture for dynamicrouting, such that only a subset of devices (overlay nodes) need
tomake the dynamic routing decisions. We determine the essentialcollection of nodes that
must bifurcate traffic for achievingthe maximum multi-commodity network throughput.
We applyour optimal node placement algorithm to several graphs andthe results show that
a small fraction of overlay nodes issufficient for achieving maximum throughput. Finally,
we proposea threshold-based policy (BP-T) and a heuristic policy (OBP),which
dynamically control traffic bifurcations at overlay nodes.Policy BP-T is proved to maximize
throughput for the case whenunderlay paths do no overlap. In all studied simulation
scenarios,OBP not only achieves full throughput but also reduces delay incomparison to
the throughput optimal backpressure routing.
EXISITNG SYSTEM:
We consider two problem areas for control of heterogeneousnetworks. First, we develop
algorithms for choosing the placementof controllable nodes, where our goal here is to allocatethe
minimum number of controllable nodes such that the fullnetwork stability region is available.
Second, given any subsetof nodes that are controllable, we also wish to develop anoptimal
routing policy that operates solely on these nodes.In the first problem area, we are given a graph

2. CONTACT: PRAVEEN KUMAR. L (,+91 – 9791938249)
MAIL ID: , praveen@nexgenproject.com
Web: www.nexgenproject.com,
G withnodes N supporting shortest-path routes between each pairof nodes. We wish to identify a
minimal set of controllablenodes V⊆Nsuch that if only these nodes are allowedto bifurcate
traffic, maximum throughput can be achieved.Ideally, (V) is the throughput region (i.e., the set of
multicommodityarrival rate vectors that can be stably supported bythe network) for graph G
when only nodes V are controllable,while Λ(N) is the throughput region when all nodes
arecontrollable. Note that comparing throughput regions directlycan be difficult, so instead we
identify a condition thatis necessary and sufficient to guarantee the full throughputregion, and
then we search for the minimal V that satisfiesthis condition.GIn the second problem area, we
consider the design ofdynamic network control policies that operate only at con-trollable nodes
V. These controllable nodes are connectedby “tunnels” or paths through uncontrollable sections
of thenetwork, where the control policy can choose when to injectpackets into a tunnel but the
tunnel itself is uncontrollable.
PROPOSED SYSTEM:
Our solutions for the first and second problem areas arecomplementary, in the sense that they can
be used togetherto solve the joint problem of providing maximum throughputwhen only a subset
of nodes are controllable. However, oursolutions can also be used in isolation; our node
placementalgorithm can be used with other control policies, and ourBP extensions can yield
maximal stability with any overlaynode placement and legacy single-path routing.Our
contributions are summarized below.• We formulate the problem of placing the minimum
numberof overlay (controllable) nodes in a legacy networkin order to achieve the full
multicommodity throughputregion and provide an efficient placement algorithm.• We apply our
placement algorithm to several scenariosof interest including regular and random graphs,
showingthat in some cases, only a small fraction of overlay nodesis sufficient for maximum
throughput.• We propose a threshold-based control policy — BP-T —as a modification of BP for
use at overlay nodes, andprove this policy to stabilize all arrival rates in Λ(V)when tunnels do
not overlap.• We propose a heuristic overlay BP policy — OBP — foruse at overlay nodes on

3. CONTACT: PRAVEEN KUMAR. L (,+91 – 9791938249)
MAIL ID: , praveen@nexgenproject.com
Web: www.nexgenproject.com,
general topologies. We show viasimulation that OBP can outperform BP when limited tocontrol
at overlay nodes, and that OBP also has betterdelay performance compared to BP with control at
allnodes.
CONCLUSIONS
We study optimal routing in legacy networks where only asubset of nodes can make dynamic
routing decisions, whilethe legacy nodes can forward packets only on pre-specifiedshortest-
paths. This model captures evolving heterogeneousnetworks where intelligence is introduced at a
fraction ofnodes. We propose a necessary and sufficient condition forthe overlay node placement
to enable the full multicommoditythroughput region. Based on this condition, we devise
analgorithm for optimal controllable node placement. We runthe algorithm on large random
graphs to show that veryoften a small number of intelligent nodes suffices for fullthroughput.
Finally, we propose dynamic routing policies tobe implemented in a network overlay. We
provide a thresholdbasedpolicy that is optimal for overlays with non-overlappingtunnels, and
provide and alternate policy for general networksthat demonstrates superior performance in
terms of boththroughput and delay
REFERENCES
[1] D. Andersen, H. Balakrishnan, F. Kaashoek, and R. Morris, “Resilientoverlay networks,” in
Proc. ACM SOSP, Oct. 2001, pp. 131–145.[Online]. Available:
http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/502034.502048
[2] L. Bui, R. Srikant, and A. Stolyar, “Novel architectures and algorithmsfor delay reduction in
back-pressure scheduling and routing,” in Proc.IEEE INFOCOM, Apr. 2009, pp. 2936–2940.
[3] B. Fortz and M. Thorup, “Internet traffic engineering by optimizingOSPF weights,” in Proc.
IEEE INFOCOM, Mar. 2000,pp. 519–528.

4. CONTACT: PRAVEEN KUMAR. L (,+91 – 9791938249)
MAIL ID: , praveen@nexgenproject.com
Web: www.nexgenproject.com,
[4] L. Georgiadis, M. J. Neely, and L. Tassiulas, “Resource allocationand cross-layer control in
wireless networks,” Found. Trends Netw.,vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 1–144, 2006. [Online]. Available:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/1300000001
[5] J. Han, D. Watson, and F. Jahanian, “Topology aware overlay networks,”in Proc. IEEE
INFOCOM, Mar. 2005, pp. 2554–2565. [Online].
Available:http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=1498540
[6] N. M. Jones, “Practical algorithms for distributed network control,”Ph.D. dissertation, Dept.
Aeronautics Astronautics Massachusetts Inst.Technol., Cambridge, MA, USA, 2013.
[7] N. M. Jones, G. S. Paschos, B. Shrader, and E. Modiano, “An overlayarchitecture for
throughput optimal multipath routing,” in Proc. ACMMobiHoc, Aug. 2014, pp. 73–82.
[8] W. Khan, L. B. Le, and E. Modiano, “Autonomous routing algorithmsfor networks with
wide-spread failures,” in Proc. IEEE MILCOM,Oct. 2009, pp. 1–6. [Online]. Available:
http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/stamp/stamp.jsp?arnumber=5379792
[9] M. J. Neely, E. Modiano, and C. E. Rohrs, “Dynamic power allocationand routing for time-
varying wireless networks,” IEEE J. Sel. AreasCommun., vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 89–103, Jan. 2005.
[Online].
Available:http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/search/srchabstract.jsp?tp=&arnumber=1208724%&queryTe
xt%3Djsac+neely+modiano+rhors%26openedRefinements%3D*%26searchField%3D%Search+
All
[10] M. E. J. Newman, Networks: An Introduction. New York, NY, USA:Oxford Univ. Press,
2010.
[11] G. S. Paschos and E. Modia