LSC2: An extended link state protocol with centralized control | Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

LSC2: An extended link state protocol with centralized control

  • Published:
Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Current link state routing is based on routing decisions made through distributed interactions among routers. Link state is disseminated by means of flooding, which possesses a few limitations, such as excessive message overhead and network-wide computation. Thus, we propose LSC2, an extended link state routing protocol with centralized control, in this paper to address this problem. In LSC2, link state advertisements (LSAs) are communicated between a centralized element (CE) and a forwarding engine (FE) rather than traditional flooding. Multiple CEs form a separate control network as a representation of the control plane. Through this control network, LSAs are disseminated to FEs in a determinate manner. We also propose a signaling protocol for independent path convergence in the control network, as well as a routing control algorithm to prevent unnecessary routing updates in the forwarding network. We implement a prototype LSC2 and evaluate its performance. Our experiments show that with the use of real topologies, LSC2 can accelerate network convergence and reduce message overhead compared with OSPF. Moreover, LSC2 is robust because having multiple CEs can prevent the occurrence of a single point of failure. LSC2 also scales well with network size by adding additional CEs to share in the processing load.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
¥17,985 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Japan)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We use “router” and “FE” interchangeably in the rest of this paper.

References

  1. Basu A, Riecke JG (2001) Stability issues in OSPF routing. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, pp 225–236

  2. Császár A, Enyedi G, Hidell M, Révái G, Sjöin P (2007) Converging the evolution of router architectures and IP networks. IEEE Netw Mag 21(4):8–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Feamster N, Rexford J (2004) The case for separating routing from routers. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM workshop, pp 5–12

  4. Caesar M, Caldwell D, Feamster N, Rexford J, Shaikh A, van der Merwe J (2005) Design and implementation of a routing control platform. In: Proceedings of 2th USENIX symposium on networked systems design & implementation (NSDI), pp 15–28

  5. Greenberg A, Hjalmtysson G, Maltz DA, Myers A, Rexford J, Xie G, Yan H, Zhan J, Zhang H (2005) A clean slate 4D approach to network control and management. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev 35(5):41–54

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Yan H, Maltz DA, Eugene Ng TS, Gogineni H, Zhang H, Cai Z (2007) Tesseract: a 4D network control plane. In: Proceedings of 4th USENIX symposium on networked systems design & implementation (NSDI), pp 369–382

  7. Casado M, Freedman MJ, Pettit J, Luo J, McKeown N, Shenker S (2007) Ethane: taking control of the enterprise. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev 35(4):1–12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Gude N, Koponen T, Pettit J, Pfaff B, Casado M, McKeown N, Shenker S (2008) NOX: towards an operating system for networks. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev 38(3):105–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Iqbal H, Znati T (2011) On the design of network control and management plane. Comput Netw 55(9):2079–2091

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Moy J (1998) OSPF version 2, IETF RFC 2328

  11. Callon R (1990) Use of OSI IS-IS for routing in tcp/ip and dual environments, IETF RFC 1195

  12. Goyal M, Soperi M, Baccelli E, Choudhury G, Shaikh A, Hosseini H, Trivedi K (2012) Improving convergence speed and scalability in OSPF: a survey. IEEE Commun Surv Tutorials 14(2):443–463

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Choudhury G (2005) Prioritized treatment of specific ospf version 2 packets and congestion avoidance, IETF RFC 4222

  14. Pillay-Esnault P (2005) OSPF refresh and flooding reduction in stable topologies, IETF RFC 4136

  15. Narvaez P, Siu K-Y, Tzeng H-Y (2000) Fault-tolerant routing in the internet without flooding, dependable network computing. In: Aversky D (ed) Kluwer, pp 193–206

  16. Wu J, Dai F, Lin X, Cao Jiannong, Jia Weijia (2003) An extended fault-tolerant link-state routing protocol in the internet. IEEE Trans Comput 52(10):1298–1311

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Levchenko K, Voelker GM, Paturi R, Savage S (2008) XL: an efficient network routing algorithm. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, pp 15–26

  18. Dijkstra EW (1959) A note on two problems in connexion with graphs. Numer Math 1(1):269–271

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  19. Francois P, Filsfils C, Evans J, Bonaventure O (2005) Achieving sub-second IGP convergence in large IP networks. ACM SIGCOMM Comput Commun Rev 15(3):35–44

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Alaettinoglu C, Jacobson V, Yu H (2000) Towards millisecond IGP convergence, internet draft draft-alaettinogly-isis-convergence-00.txt

  21. Thorup M (2003) OSPF areas considered harmful. Private paper

  22. Fu J, Sjödin P, Karlsson Gunnar (2009) Intra-domain Q3 routing convergence with centralized control. Comput Netw 53(18):2985–2996

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. McKeown N, Anderson T, Balakrishnan H, Parulkar G, Peterson L, Rexford J, Shenker S, Turner J (2008) OpenFlow: enabling innovation in campus networks. ACM Comput Commun Rev 38(2):69–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gude N, Koponen T, Pettit J, Pfaff B, Casado M, McKeown N, Shenker S (2008) NOX: toward an operating system for networks. ACM Comput Commun Rev 38(3):105–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Tootoonchian A, Ganjali Y (2010) Hyperflow: a distributed control plane for openflow. In: Proceedings of INM/WREN

  26. Koponen T, Casado M, Gude N, Stribling J, Poutievski L, Zhu R, Ramanathan M, Iwata Y, Inoue H, Hama T, Shenker S (2010) Onix: a distributed control platform for large-scale production networks. In: Proceedings of operating systems design and implementation, pp 351–364

  27. Yu M, Rexford J, Freedman MJ, Wang J (2010) Scalable flow-based networking with DIFANE. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, pp 351–362

  28. Raghavan B, Koponen T, Ghodsi A, Casado M, Ratnasamy S, Shenker Scott (2012) Software-defined internet architecture: decoupling architecture from infrastructure. In: Proceedings of ACM workshop on hot topics in networks (HotNets), pp 43–48

  29. Gibb G, Zeng H, McKeown N (2012) Outsourcing network functionality. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM workshop on hot topics in software defined networks (HotSDN), pp 73–78

  30. Iqbal H, Znati T (2007) Distributed control plane for 4D architecture. In: Proceedings of IEEE global telecommunications conference, pp 1901–1905

  31. Quagga Routing Suite. http://www.quagga.net

  32. Ahrenholz J (2010) Comparison of CORE network emulation platforms. In: Proceedings of IEEE MILCOM conference, pp 864–869

  33. OpenVZ Linux Containers. http://wiki.openvz.org/

  34. GEANT2 project. http://www.geant2.net/

  35. Spring N, Mahajan R, Wetheral D (2002) Measuring ISP topologies with RocketFuel. In: Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, pp 133–145

  36. Katz D, Ward D (2010) Bidirectional forwarding detection (BFD), RFC, p 5880

Download references

Acknowledgments

The work described in this paper is supported by the NSFC under Grant No.61103189 and No.61070199, Program for Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Team in University (No.IRT 1012), Program for Science and Technology Innovative Research Team in Higher Educational Institutions of Hunan Province: “network technology”, and Hunan Province Natural Science Foundation of China (11JJ7003).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Computer, National University of DefenseTechnology, Changsha, Hunan, China

    Dan Zhao, Chunqing Wu, Xiaofeng Hu & Hongjun Liu

Authors
  1. Dan Zhao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Chunqing Wu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Xiaofeng Hu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hongjun Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Dan Zhao.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Zhao, D., Wu, C., Hu, X. et al. LSC2: An extended link state protocol with centralized control. Peer-to-Peer Netw. Appl. 8, 651–663 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-013-0226-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-013-0226-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation