| < draft-widjaja-mpls-vc-merge-00.txt | draft-widjaja-mpls-vc-merge-01.txt > | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MPLS Working Group Indra Widjaja | Network Working Group Indra Widjaja | |||
| Fujitsu Network Communications | Fujitsu Network Communications | |||
| Internet Draft Anwar Elwalid | Internet Draft Anwar Elwalid | |||
| Expiration: Dec 1997 Bell Labs, Lucent Technologies | Expired in six months Bell Labs, Lucent Technologies | |||
| July 1997 | October 1998 | |||
| Performance Issues in VC-Merge Capable MPLS Switches | Performance Issues in VC-Merge Capable ATM LSRs | |||
| <draft-widjaja-mpls-vc-merge-00.txt> | <draft-widjaja-mpls-vc-merge-01.txt> | |||
| Status of this Memo | Status of this Memo | |||
| This document is an Internet Draft. Internet Drafts are working | This document is an Internet Draft. Internet Drafts are working | |||
| documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its Areas, | documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its Areas, | |||
| and its Working Groups. Note that other groups may also distribute | and its Working Groups. Note that other groups may also distribute | |||
| working documents as Internet Drafts. | working documents as Internet Drafts. | |||
| Internet Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six | Internet Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six | |||
| months. Internet Drafts may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by | months. Internet Drafts may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by | |||
| other documents at any time. It is not appropriate to use Internet | other documents at any time. It is not appropriate to use Internet | |||
| Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as a "working | Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than as a "working | |||
| draft" or "work in progress." | draft" or "work in progress." | |||
| Please check the 1id-abstracts.txt listing contained in the | Please check the 1id-abstracts.txt listing contained in the | |||
| internet-drafts Shadow Directories on nic.ddn.mil, nnsc.nsf.net, | internet-drafts Shadow Directories on nic.ddn.mil, nnsc.nsf.net, | |||
| nic.nordu.net, ftp.nisc.sri.com, or munnari.oz.au to learn the | nic.nordu.net, ftp.nisc.sri.com, or munnari.oz.au to learn the | |||
| current status of any Internet Draft. | current status of any Internet Draft. | |||
| Abstract | Abstract | |||
| VC merging allows many routes to be mapped to the same VC label, | VC merging allows many routes to be mapped to the same VC label, | |||
| thereby providing a scalable mapping method that can support tens of | thereby providing a scalable mapping method that can support | |||
| thousands of edge routers. VC merging requires reassembly buffers so | thousands of edge routers. VC merging requires reassembly buffers so | |||
| that cells belonging to different packets intended for the same | that cells belonging to different packets intended for the same | |||
| destination do not interleave with each other. This document | destination do not interleave with each other. This document | |||
| investigates the impact of VC merging on the additional buffer | investigates the impact of VC merging on the additional buffer | |||
| required for the reassembly buffers and other buffers. The main | required for the reassembly buffers and other buffers. The main | |||
| result indicates that VC merging incurs a minimal overhead compared | result indicates that VC merging incurs a minimal overhead compared | |||
| to non-VC merging in terms of additional buffering. Moreover, the | to non-VC merging in terms of additional buffering. Moreover, the | |||
| overhead decreases as utilization increases, or as the traffic | overhead decreases as utilization increases, or as the traffic | |||
| becomes more bursty. | becomes more bursty. | |||
| 1. Introduction | 1.0 Introduction | |||
| Recently some radical proposals to overhaul the legacy router architec- | Recently some radical proposals to overhaul the legacy router | |||
| tures have been presented by several organizations, notably the | architectures have been presented by several organizations, notably | |||
| Ipsilon's IP switching [1], Cisco's Tag switching [2], Toshiba's CSR | the Ipsilon's IP switching [1], Cisco's Tag switching [2], Toshiba's | |||
| [3], IBM's ARIS [4], and IETF's MPLS [5]. Although the details of their | CSR [3], IBM's ARIS [4], and IETF's MPLS [5]. Although the details | |||
| implementations vary, there is one fundamental concept that is shared by | of their implementations vary, there is one fundamental concept that | |||
| all these proposals: map the route information to short fixed-length | is shared by all these proposals: map the route information to short | |||
| labels so that next-hop routers can be determined quickly through index- | fixed-length labels so that next-hop routers can be determined by | |||
| ing rather than some type of searching (or matching longest prefixes). | direct indexing. | |||
| Although any layer 2 switching mechanism can in principle be applied, | Although any layer 2 switching mechanism can in principle be applied, | |||
| the use of ATM switches in the backbone network is believed to be the | the use of ATM switches in the backbone network is believed to be a | |||
| most attractive solution since ATM hardware switches have been exten- | very attractive solution since ATM hardware switches have been exten- | |||
| sively studied and are widely available in many different architectures. | sively studied and are widely available in many different architec- | |||
| In this document, we will assume that layer 2 switching uses ATM tech- | tures. In this document, we will assume that layer 2 switching uses | |||
| nology. In this case, each IP packet may be segmented to multiple 53- | ATM technology. In this case, each IP packet may be segmented to mul- | |||
| byte cells before being switched. Traditionally, AAL 5 has been used as | tiple 53-byte cells before being switched. Traditionally, AAL 5 has | |||
| the encapsulation method in data communications since it is simple, | been used as the encapsulation method in data communications since it | |||
| efficient, and has a powerful error detection mechanism. For the ATM | is simple, efficient, and has a powerful error detection mechanism. | |||
| switch to forward incoming cells to the correct outputs, the IP route | For the ATM switch to forward incoming cells to the correct outputs, | |||
| information needs to be mapped to ATM labels which are kept in the VPI | the IP route information needs to be mapped to ATM labels which are | |||
| or/and VCI fields. The relevant route information that is stored semi- | kept in the VPI or/and VCI fields. The relevant route information | |||
| permanently in the IP routing table contains the tuple (destination, | that is stored semi-permanently in the IP routing table contains the | |||
| next-hop router). The route information changes when the network state | tuple (destination, next-hop router). The route information changes | |||
| changes and this typically occurs slowly, except during transient cases. | when the network state changes and this typically occurs slowly, | |||
| The word ``destination'' typically refers to the destination network (or | except during transient cases. The word ``destination'' typically | |||
| CIDR prefix), but can be readily generalized to (destination network, | refers to the destination network (or CIDR prefix), but can be | |||
| QoS), (destination host, QoS), or many other granularities. In this doc- | readily generalized to (destination network, QoS), (destination host, | |||
| ument, the destination can mean any of the above or other possible gran- | QoS), or many other granularities. In this document, the destination | |||
| ularities. | can mean any of the above or other possible granularities. | |||
| Several methods of mapping the route information to ATM labels exist. | Several methods of mapping the route information to ATM labels exist. | |||
| In the simplest form, each source-destination pair is mapped to a unique | In the simplest form, each source-destination pair is mapped to a | |||
| VC value at a switch. This method, called the non-VC merging case, | unique VC value at a switch. This method, called the non-VC merging | |||
| allows the receiver to easily reassemble cells into respective packets | case, allows the receiver to easily reassemble cells into respective | |||
| since the VC values can be used to distinguish the senders. However, if | packets since the VC values can be used to distinguish the senders. | |||
| there are n sources and destinations, each switch is potentially | However, if there are n sources and destinations, each switch is | |||
| required to manage O(n^2) VC labels for full-meshed connectivity. For | potentially required to manage O(n^2) VC labels for full-meshed con- | |||
| example, if there are 1,000 sources/destinations, then the size of the | nectivity. For example, if there are 1,000 sources/destinations, | |||
| VC routing table is on the order of 1,000,000 entries. Clearly, this | then the size of the VC routing table is on the order of 1,000,000 | |||
| method is not scalable to large networks. In the second method called | entries. Clearly, this method is not scalable to large networks. In | |||
| VP merging, the VP labels of cells that are intended for the same desti- | the second method called VP merging, the VP labels of cells that are | |||
| nation would be translated to the same outgoing VP value, thereby reduc- | intended for the same destination would be translated to the same | |||
| ing VP consumption downstream. For each VP, the VC value is used to | outgoing VP value, thereby reducing VP consumption downstream. For | |||
| identify the sender so that the receiver can reconstruct packets even | each VP, the VC value is used to identify the sender so that the | |||
| though cells from different packets are allowed to interleave. For a | receiver can reconstruct packets even though cells from different | |||
| given destination, the switch would encounter O(e) incoming VP labels , | packets are allowed to interleave. Each switch is now required to | |||
| where e is the number of switch ports (typically, 8 to 16) which may | manage O(n) VP labels - a considerable saving from O(n^2). Although | |||
| depend on the network size (or n). If there are n destinations, each | the number of label entries is considerably reduced, VP merging is | |||
| switch would is now required to manage O(e*n) VP labels - a considerable | limited to only 4,096 entries at the network-to-network interface. | |||
| saving from O(n^2). Although the number of label entries is consider- | ||||
| ably reduced, VP merging is not practical since the VP space is limited | ||||
| to only 4,096 entries at the network-to-network interface. A third | ||||
| method, called VC merging, maps incoming VC labels for the same desti- | ||||
| nation to the same outgoing VC label. This method is scalable and does | ||||
| not have the space constraint problem as in VP merging. With VC merging, | ||||
| cells for the same destination is indistinguishable at the output of a | ||||
| switch. Therefore, cells belonging to different packets for the same | ||||
| destination cannot interleave with each other, or else the receiver will | ||||
| not be able to reassemble the packets. With VC merging, the boundary | ||||
| between two adjacent packets are identified by the ``End-of-Packet'' | ||||
| (EOP) marker used by AAL 5. | ||||
| It is worthy to mention that cell interleaving may be allowed if we use | Moreover, VP merging requires coordination of the VC values for a | |||
| the AAL 3/4 Message Identifier (MID) field to identify the sender | given VP, which introduces more complexity. A third method, called | |||
| uniquely. However, this method has some serious drawbacks as: 1) the MID | VC merging, maps incoming VC labels for the same destination to the | |||
| size may not be sufficient to identify all senders, 2) the encapsulation | same outgoing VC label. This method is scalable and does not have the | |||
| method is not efficient, 3) the CRC capability is not as powerful as in | space constraint problem as in VP merging. With VC merging, cells for | |||
| AAL 5, and 4) AAL 3/4 is not as widely supported as AAL 5 in data commu- | the same destination is indistinguishable at the output of a switch. | |||
| nications. | Therefore, cells belonging to different packets for the same destina- | |||
| tion cannot interleave with each other, or else the receiver will not | ||||
| be able to reassemble the packets. With VC merging, the boundary | ||||
| between two adjacent packets are identified by the ``End-of-Packet'' | ||||
| (EOP) marker used by AAL 5. | ||||
| Before VC merging with no cell interleaving can be qualified as the most | It is worthy to mention that cell interleaving may be allowed if we | |||
| promising approach, two main issues need to be addressed. First, the | use the AAL 3/4 Message Identifier (MID) field to identify the sender | |||
| feasibility of an ATM switch that is capable of merging VCs needs to be | uniquely. However, this method has some serious drawbacks as: 1) the | |||
| investigated. Second, there is widespread concern that the additional | MID size may not be sufficient to identify all senders, 2) the encap- | |||
| amount of buffering required to implement VC merging is excessive and | sulation method is not efficient, 3) the CRC capability is not as | |||
| thus making the VC-merging method impractical. Through analysis and | powerful as in AAL 5, and 4) AAL 3/4 is not as widely supported as | |||
| simulation, we will dispel these concerns in this document by showing | AAL 5 in data communications. | |||
| that the additional buffer requirement for VC merging is minimal for | ||||
| most practical purposes. Other performance related issues such addi- | ||||
| tional delay due to VC merging will also be discussed. | ||||
| 2. A VC-Merge Capable MPLS Switch Architecture | Before VC merging with no cell interleaving can be qualified as the | |||
| most promising approach, two main issues need to be addressed. | ||||
| First, the feasibility of an ATM switch that is capable of merging | ||||
| VCs needs to be investigated. Second, there is widespread concern | ||||
| that the additional amount of buffering required to implement VC | ||||
| merging is excessive and thus making the VC-merging method impracti- | ||||
| cal. Through analysis and simulation, we will dispel these concerns | ||||
| in this document by showing that the additional buffer requirement | ||||
| for VC merging is minimal for most practical purposes. Other perfor- | ||||
| mance related issues such additional delay due to VC merging will | ||||
| also be discussed. | ||||
| In principle, the reassembly buffers can be placed at the input or out- | 2.0 A VC-Merge Capable MPLS Switch Architecture | |||
| put side of a switch. If they are located at the input, then the switch | ||||
| fabric has to transfer all cells belonging to a given packet in an | ||||
| atomic manner since cells are not allowed to interleave. This requires | ||||
| the fabric to perform frame switching which is not flexible nor desir- | ||||
| able when multiple QoSs need to be supported. On the other hand, if the | ||||
| reassembly buffers are located at the output, the switch fabric can | ||||
| forward each cell independently as in normal ATM switching. Placing the | ||||
| reassembly buffers at the output makes an output-buffered ATM switch a | ||||
| natural choice. | ||||
| We consider a generic output-buffered VC-merge capable MPLS switch with | In principle, the reassembly buffers can be placed at the input or | |||
| VCI translation performed at the output. Other possible architectures | output side of a switch. If they are located at the input, then the | |||
| may also be adopted. The switch consists of a non-blocking cell switch | switch fabric has to transfer all cells belonging to a given packet | |||
| fabric and multiple output modules (OMs), each is associated with an | in an atomic manner since cells are not allowed to interleave. This | |||
| output port. Each arriving ATM cell is appended with two fields con- | requires the fabric to perform frame switching which is not flexible | |||
| taining an output port number and an input port number. Based on the | nor desirable when multiple QoSs need to be supported. On the other | |||
| output port number, the switch fabric forwards each cell to the correct | hand, if the reassembly buffers are located at the output, the switch | |||
| output port, just as in normal ATM switches. If VC merging is not | fabric can forward each cell independently as in normal ATM switch- | |||
| implemented, then the OM consists of an output buffer. If VC merging is | ing. Placing the reassembly buffers at the output makes an output- | |||
| implemented, the OM contains a number of reassembly buffers (RBs), fol- | buffered ATM switch a natural choice. | |||
| lowed by a merging unit, and an output buffer. Each RB typically corre- | ||||
| sponds to an incoming VC value. It is important to note that each buffer | ||||
| is a logical buffer, and it is envisioned that a common pool of memory | ||||
| for the reassembly buffers and the output buffer. | ||||
| The purpose of the RB is to ensure that cells for a given packet do not | We consider a generic output-buffered VC-merge capable MPLS switch | |||
| interleave with other cells that are merged to the same VC. This mecha- | with VCI translation performed at the output. Other possible archi- | |||
| nism (called store-and-forward at the packet level) can be accomplished | tectures may also be adopted. The switch consists of a non-blocking | |||
| by storing each incoming cell for a given packet at the RB until the | cell switch fabric and multiple output modules (OMs), each is associ- | |||
| last cell of the packet arrives. When the last cell arrives, all cells | ated with an output port. Each arriving ATM cell is appended with | |||
| in the packet are transferred in an atomic manner to the output buffer | two fields containing an output port number and an input port number. | |||
| for transmission to the next hop. It is worth pointing out that perform- | Based on the output port number, the switch fabric forwards each cell | |||
| ing a cut-through mode at the RB is not recommended since it would | to the correct output port, just as in normal ATM switches. If VC | |||
| result in wastage of bandwidth if the subsequent cells are delayed. | merging is not implemented, then the OM consists of an output buffer. | |||
| During the transfer of a packet to the output buffer, the incoming VCI | If VC merging is implemented, the OM contains a number of reassembly | |||
| is translated to the outgoing VCI by the merging unit. To save VC | buffers (RBs), followed by a merging unit, and an output buffer. Each | |||
| translation table space, different incoming VCIs are merged to the same | RB typically corresponds to an incoming VC value. It is important to | |||
| outgoing VCI during the translation process if the cells are intended | note that each buffer is a logical buffer, and it is envisioned that | |||
| for the same destination. If all traffic is best-effort, full-merging | a common pool of memory for the reassembly buffers and the output | |||
| where all incoming VCs destined for the same destination network are | buffer. | |||
| mapped to the same outgoing VC, can be implemented. However, if the | ||||
| traffic is composed of multiple classes, it is desirable to implement | ||||
| partial merging, where incoming VCs destined for the same (destination | ||||
| network, QoS) are mapped to the same outgoing VC. | ||||
| Regardless of whether full merging or partial merging is implemented, | The purpose of the RB is to ensure that cells for a given packet do | |||
| the output buffer may consist of a single FIFO buffer or multiple | not interleave with other cells that are merged to the same VC. This | |||
| buffers each corresponds to a destination network or (destination net- | mechanism (called store-and-forward at the packet level) can be | |||
| work, QoS). If a single output buffer is used, then the switch essen- | accomplished by storing each incoming cell for a given packet at the | |||
| tially tries to emulate frame switching. If multiple output buffers are | RB until the last cell of the packet arrives. When the last cell | |||
| used, VC merging is different from frame switching since cells of a | arrives, all cells in the packet are transferred in an atomic manner | |||
| given packet are not bound to be transmitted back-to-back. In fact, | to the output buffer for transmission to the next hop. It is worth | |||
| fair queueing can be implemented so that cells from their respective | pointing out that performing a cut-through mode at the RB is not | |||
| output buffers are served according to some QoS requirements. Note that | recommended since it would result in wastage of bandwidth if the sub- | |||
| cell-by-cell scheduling can be implemented with VC merging, whereas only | sequent cells are delayed. During the transfer of a packet to the | |||
| packet-by-packet scheduling can be implemented with frame switching. In | output buffer, the incoming VCI is translated to the outgoing VCI by | |||
| summary, VC merging is more flexible than frame switching and supports | the merging unit. To save VC translation table space, different | |||
| better QoS control. | incoming VCIs are merged to the same outgoing VCI during the transla- | |||
| tion process if the cells are intended for the same destination. If | ||||
| all traffic is best-effort, full-merging where all incoming VCs des- | ||||
| tined for the same destination network are mapped to the same outgo- | ||||
| ing VC, can be implemented. However, if the traffic is composed of | ||||
| multiple classes, it is desirable to implement partial merging, where | ||||
| incoming VCs destined for the same (destination network, QoS) are | ||||
| mapped to the same outgoing VC. | ||||
| 3. Performance Investigation of VC Merging | Regardless of whether full merging or partial merging is implemented, | |||
| the output buffer may consist of a single FIFO buffer or multiple | ||||
| buffers each corresponds to a destination network or (destination | ||||
| network, QoS). If a single output buffer is used, then the switch | ||||
| essentially tries to emulate frame switching. If multiple output | ||||
| buffers are used, VC merging is different from frame switching since | ||||
| cells of a given packet are not bound to be transmitted back-to-back. | ||||
| In fact, fair queueing can be implemented so that cells from their | ||||
| respective output buffers are served according to some QoS require- | ||||
| ments. Note that cell-by-cell scheduling can be implemented with VC | ||||
| merging, whereas only packet-by-packet scheduling can be implemented | ||||
| with frame switching. In summary, VC merging is more flexible than | ||||
| frame switching and supports better QoS control. | ||||
| This section compares the VC-merging switch and the non-VC merging | 3.0 Performance Investigation of VC Merging | |||
| switch. The non-VC merging switch is analogous to the traditional | ||||
| output-buffered ATM switch, whereby cells of any packets are allowed to | ||||
| interleave. Since each cell is a distinct unit of information, the | ||||
| non-VC merging switch is a work-conserving system at the cell level. On | ||||
| the other hand, the VC-merging switch is non-work conserving so its per- | ||||
| formance is always lower than that of the non-VC merging switch. The | ||||
| main objective here is to study the effect of VC merging on performance | ||||
| implications of MPLS switches such as additional delay, additional | ||||
| buffer, etc., subject to different traffic conditions. | ||||
| In the simulation, the arrival process to each reassembly buffer is an | This section compares the VC-merging switch and the non-VC merging | |||
| independent ON-OFF process. Cells within an ON period form a single | switch. The non-VC merging switch is analogous to the traditional | |||
| packet. During an OFF periof, the slots are idle. | output-buffered ATM switch, whereby cells of any packets are allowed | |||
| to interleave. Since each cell is a distinct unit of information, | ||||
| the non-VC merging switch is a work-conserving system at the cell | ||||
| level. On the other hand, the VC-merging switch is non-work conserv- | ||||
| ing so its performance is always lower than that of the non-VC merg- | ||||
| ing switch. The main objective here is to study the effect of VC | ||||
| merging on performance implications of MPLS switches such as addi- | ||||
| tional delay, additional buffer, etc., subject to different traffic | ||||
| conditions. | ||||
| 3.1 Effect of Utilization on Additional Buffer Requirement | In the simulation, the arrival process to each reassembly buffer is | |||
| an independent ON-OFF process. Cells within an ON period form a sin- | ||||
| gle packet. During an OFF periof, the slots are idle. Note that the | ||||
| ON-OFF process is a general process that can model any traffic pro- | ||||
| cess. | ||||
| We first investigate the effect of switch utilization on the additional | 3.1 Effect of Utilization on Additional Buffer Requirement | |||
| buffer requirement for a given overflow probability. To carry the com- | ||||
| parison, we analyze the VC-merging and non-VC merging case when the | ||||
| average packet size is equal to 10 cells, using geometrically dis- | ||||
| tributed packet sizes and packet interarrival times, with cells of a | ||||
| packet arriving contiguously (later, we consider other distributions). | ||||
| The results show, as expected, the VC-merging switch requires more | ||||
| buffers than the non-VC merging switch. When the utilization is low, | ||||
| there may be relatively many incomplete packets in the reassembly | ||||
| buffers at any given time, thus wasting storage resource. For example, | ||||
| when the utilization is 0.3, VC merging requires an additional storage | ||||
| of about 45 cells to achieve the same overflow probability. However, as | ||||
| the utilization increases to 0.9, the additional storage to achieve the | ||||
| same overflow probability drops to about 30 cells. The reason is that | ||||
| when traffic intensity increases, the VC-merging system becomes more | ||||
| work-conserving. | ||||
| It is important to note that ATM switches must be dimensioned at high | We first investigate the effect of switch utilization on the addi- | |||
| utilization value (in the range of 0.8-0.9) to withstand harsh traffic | tional buffer requirement for a given overflow probability. To carry | |||
| conditions. At the utilization of 0.9, a VC-merge ATM switch requires a | the comparison, we analyze the VC-merging and non-VC merging case | |||
| buffer of size 976 cells to provide an overflow probability of 10^{-5}, | when the average packet size is equal to 10 cells, using geometri- | |||
| whereas an non-VC merge ATM switch requires a buffer of size 946. These | cally distributed packet sizes and packet interarrival times, with | |||
| numbers translate the additional buffer requirement for VC merging to | cells of a packet arriving contiguously (later, we consider other | |||
| about 3% - hardly an additional hardware cost. | distributions). The results show, as expected, the VC-merging switch | |||
| requires more buffers than the non-VC merging switch. When the utili- | ||||
| zation is low, there may be relatively many incomplete packets in the | ||||
| reassembly buffers at any given time, thus wasting storage resource. | ||||
| For example, when the utilization is 0.3, VC merging requires an | ||||
| additional storage of about 45 cells to achieve the same overflow | ||||
| probability. However, as the utilization increases to 0.9, the addi- | ||||
| tional storage to achieve the same overflow probability drops to | ||||
| about 30 cells. The reason is that when traffic intensity increases, | ||||
| the VC-merging system becomes more work-conserving. | ||||
| 3.2 Effect of Packet Size on Additional Buffer Requirement | It is important to note that ATM switches must be dimensioned at high | |||
| utilization value (in the range of 0.8-0.9) to withstand harsh | ||||
| traffic conditions. At the utilization of 0.9, a VC-merge ATM switch | ||||
| requires a buffer of size 976 cells to provide an overflow | ||||
| probability of 10^{-5}, whereas an non-VC merge ATM switch requires a | ||||
| buffer of size 946. These numbers translate the additional buffer | ||||
| requirement for VC merging to about 3% - hardly an additional buffer- | ||||
| ing cost. | ||||
| We now vary the average packet size to see the impact on the buffer | 3.2 Effect of Packet Size on Additional Buffer Requirement | |||
| requirement. We fix the utilization to 0.5 and use two different aver- | ||||
| age packet sizes; that is, B=10 and B=30. To achieve the same overflow | ||||
| probability, VC merging requires an additional buffer of about 40 cells | ||||
| (or 4 packets) compared to non-VC merging when B=10. When B=30, the | ||||
| additional buffer requirement is about 90 cells (or 3 packets). In | ||||
| terms of the number of packets, the additional buffer requirement does | ||||
| not increase as the average packet size increases. | ||||
| 3.3 Additional Buffer Overhead Due to Packet Reassembly | We now vary the average packet size to see the impact on the buffer | |||
| requirement. We fix the utilization to 0.5 and use two different | ||||
| average packet sizes; that is, B=10 and B=30. To achieve the same | ||||
| overflow probability, VC merging requires an additional buffer of | ||||
| about 40 cells (or 4 packets) compared to non-VC merging when B=10. | ||||
| When B=30, the additional buffer requirement is about 90 cells (or 3 | ||||
| packets). As expected, the additional buffer requirement in terms of | ||||
| cells increases as the packet size increases. However, the additional | ||||
| buffer requirement is roughly constant in terms of packets. | ||||
| There may be some concern that VC merging may require too much buffering | 3.3 Additional Buffer Overhead Due to Packet Reassembly | |||
| when the number of reassembly buffers increases, which would happen if | ||||
| the switch size is increased or if cells for packets going to different | ||||
| destinations are allowed to interleave. We will show that the concern | ||||
| is unfounded since buffer sharing becomes more efficient as the number | ||||
| of reassembly buffers increases. | ||||
| To demonstrate our argument, we consider the overflow probability for VC | There may be some concern that VC merging may require too much | |||
| merging for several values of reassembly buffers (N); i.e., N=4, 8, 16, | buffering when the number of reassembly buffers increases, which | |||
| 32, 64, and 128. The utilization is fixed to 0.8 for each case, and the | would happen if the switch size is increased or if cells for packets | |||
| average packet size is chosen to be 10. For a given overflow probabil- | going to different destinations are allowed to interleave. We will | |||
| ity, the increase in buffer requirement becomes less pronounced as N | show that the concern is unfounded since buffer sharing becomes more | |||
| increases. Beyond a certain value (N=32), the increase in buffer | efficient as the number of reassembly buffers increases. | |||
| requirement becomes insignificant. The reason is that as N increases, | ||||
| the traffic gets thinned and eventually approaches a limiting process. | ||||
| 3.4 Effect of Interarrival time Distribution on Additional Buffer | To demonstrate our argument, we consider the overflow probability for | |||
| VC merging for several values of reassembly buffers (N); i.e., N=4, | ||||
| 8, 16, 32, 64, and 128. The utilization is fixed to 0.8 for each | ||||
| case, and the average packet size is chosen to be 10. For a given | ||||
| overflow probability, the increase in buffer requirement becomes less | ||||
| pronounced as N increases. Beyond a certain value (N=32), the | ||||
| increase in buffer requirement becomes insignificant. The reason is | ||||
| that as N increases, the traffic gets thinned and eventually | ||||
| approaches a limiting process. | ||||
| We now turn our attention to different traffic processes. First, we use | 3.4 Effect of Interarrival time Distribution on Additional Buffer | |||
| the same ON period distribution and change the OFF period distribution | ||||
| from geometric to hypergeometric which has a larger Square Coefficient | ||||
| of Variation (SCV), defined to be the ratio of the variance to the | ||||
| square of the mean. Here we fix the utilization at 0.5. As expected, | ||||
| the switch performance degrades as the SCV increases in both the VC- | ||||
| merging and non-VC merging cases. To achieve a buffer overflow proba- | ||||
| bility of 10^{-4}, the additional buffer required is about 40 cells when | ||||
| SCV=1, 26 cells when SCV=1.5, and 24 cells when SCV=2.6. The result | ||||
| shows that VC merging becomes more work-conserving as SCV increases. In | ||||
| summary, as the interarrival time between packets becomes more bursty, | ||||
| the additional buffer requirement for VC merging diminishes. | ||||
| 3.5 Effect of Internet Packets on Additional Buffer Requirement | We now turn our attention to different traffic processes. First, we | |||
| use the same ON period distribution and change the OFF period distri- | ||||
| bution from geometric to hypergeometric which has a larger Square | ||||
| Coefficient of Variation (SCV), defined to be the ratio of the vari- | ||||
| ance to the square of the mean. Here we fix the utilization at 0.5. | ||||
| As expected, the switch performance degrades as the SCV increases in | ||||
| both the VC-merging and non-VC merging cases. To achieve a buffer | ||||
| overflow probability of 10^{-4}, the additional buffer required is | ||||
| about 40 cells when SCV=1, 26 cells when SCV=1.5, and 24 cells when | ||||
| SCV=2.6. The result shows that VC merging becomes more work- | ||||
| conserving as SCV increases. In summary, as the interarrival time | ||||
| between packets becomes more bursty, the additional buffer require- | ||||
| ment for VC merging diminishes. | ||||
| Up to now, the packet size has been modeled as a geometric distribution | 3.5 Effect of Internet Packets on Additional Buffer Requirement | |||
| with a certain parameter. We now modify the packet size distribution to | ||||
| a more realistic one. Since the initial deployment of VC-merge capable | ||||
| ATM switches is likely to be in the core network, it is more realistic | ||||
| to consider the packet size distribution in the Wide Area Network. To | ||||
| this end, we refer to the data given in [6]. The data collected on Feb | ||||
| 10, 1996, in FIX-West network, is in the form of probability mass func- | ||||
| tion versus packet size in bytes. Data collected at other dates closely | ||||
| resemble this one. | ||||
| The distribution appears bi-modal with two big masses at 40 bytes (about | Up to now, the packet size has been modeled as a geometric distribu- | |||
| a third) due to TCP acknowledgment packets, and 552 bytes (about 22 per- | tion with a certain parameter. We modify the packet size distribu- | |||
| cent) due to Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU) limitations in many | tion to a more realistic one for the rest of this document. Since | |||
| routers. Other prominent packet sizes include 72 bytes (about 4.1 per- | the initial deployment of VC-merge capable ATM switches is likely to | |||
| cent), 576 bytes (about 3.6 percent), 44 bytes (about 3 percent), 185 | be in the core network, it is more realistic to consider the packet | |||
| bytes (about 2.7 percent), and 1500 bytes (about 1.5 percent) due to | size distribution in the Wide Area Network. To this end, we refer to | |||
| Ethernet MTU. The mean packet size is 257 bytes, and the variance is | the data given in [6]. The data collected on Feb 10, 1996, in FIX- | |||
| 84,287 bytes^2. Thus, the SCV for the Internet packet size is about 1.1. | West network, is in the form of probability mass function versus | |||
| packet size in bytes. Data collected at other dates closely resemble | ||||
| this one. | ||||
| To convert the IP packet size in bytes to ATM cells, we assume AAL 5 | The distribution appears bi-modal with two big masses at 40 bytes | |||
| using null encapsulation where the additional overhead in AAL 5 is 8 | (about a third) due to TCP acknowledgment packets, and 552 bytes | |||
| bytes long [7]. Using the null encapsulation technique, the average | (about 22 percent) due to Maximum Transmission Unit (MTU) limitations | |||
| packet size is about 6.2 ATM cells. | in many routers. Other prominent packet sizes include 72 bytes (about | |||
| 4.1 percent), 576 bytes (about 3.6 percent), 44 bytes (about 3 per- | ||||
| cent), 185 bytes (about 2.7 percent), and 1500 bytes (about 1.5 per- | ||||
| cent) due to Ethernet MTU. The mean packet size is 257 bytes, and | ||||
| the variance is 84,287 bytes^2. Thus, the SCV for the Internet packet | ||||
| size is about 1.1. | ||||
| We examine the buffer overflow probability against the buffer size using | To convert the IP packet size in bytes to ATM cells, we assume AAL 5 | |||
| the Internet packet size distribution. The OFF period is assumed to have | using null encapsulation where the additional overhead in AAL 5 is 8 | |||
| a geometric distribution. Again, we find that the same behavior as | bytes long [7]. Using the null encapsulation technique, the average | |||
| before, except that the buffer requirement drops with Internet packets | packet size is about 6.2 ATM cells. | |||
| due to smaller average packet size. | ||||
| 3.6 Effect of Correlated Interarrival Times on Additional Buffer | We examine the buffer overflow probability against the buffer size | |||
| using the Internet packet size distribution. The OFF period is | ||||
| assumed to have a geometric distribution. Again, we find that the | ||||
| same behavior as before, except that the buffer requirement drops | ||||
| with Internet packets due to smaller average packet size. | ||||
| To model correlated interarrival times, we use the DAR(p) process (dis- | 3.6 Effect of Correlated Interarrival Times on Additional Buffer | |||
| crete autoregressive process of order p) [8], which has been used to | Requirement | |||
| accurately model video traffic (Star Wars movie) in [9]. The DAR(p) | ||||
| process is a p-th order (lag-p) discrete-time Markov chain. The state of | ||||
| the process at time n depends explicitly on the states at times (n-1), | ||||
| ..., (n-p). | ||||
| We examine the overflow probability for the case where the interarrival | To model correlated interarrival times, we use the DAR(p) process | |||
| time between packets is geometric and independent, and the case where | (discrete autoregressive process of order p) [8], which has been used | |||
| the interarrival time is geometric and correlated to the previous one | to accurately model video traffic (Star Wars movie) in [9]. The | |||
| with coefficient of correlation equal to 0.9. The empirical distribution | DAR(p) process is a p-th order (lag-p) discrete-time Markov chain. | |||
| of the Internet packet size from the last section is used. The utiliza- | The state of the process at time n depends explicitly on the states | |||
| tion is fixed to 0.5 in each case. Although, the overflow probability | at times (n-1), ..., (n-p). | |||
| increases as p increases, the additional amount of buffering actually | ||||
| decreases for VC merging as p, or equivalently the correlation, | ||||
| increases. One can easily conclude that higher-order correlation or | ||||
| long-range dependence will result in similar qualitative performance. | ||||
| 3.7 Slow Sources | We examine the overflow probability for the case where the interar- | |||
| rival time between packets is geometric and independent, and the case | ||||
| where the interarrival time is geometric and correlated to the previ- | ||||
| ous one with coefficient of correlation equal to 0.9. The empirical | ||||
| distribution of the Internet packet size from the last section is | ||||
| used. The utilization is fixed to 0.5 in each case. Although, the | ||||
| overflow probability increases as p increases, the additional amount | ||||
| of buffering actually decreases for VC merging as p, or equivalently | ||||
| the correlation, increases. One can easily conclude that higher- | ||||
| order correlation or long-range dependence, which occurs in self- | ||||
| similar traffic, will result in similar qualitative performance. | ||||
| The discussions up to now have assumed that cells within a packet arrive | 3.7 Slow Sources | |||
| back-to-back. With slow sources, adjacent cells would typically be | ||||
| spaced by idle slots. Adjacent cells within the same packet may also be | ||||
| perturbed and spaced as these cells travel downstream due to the merging | ||||
| and splitting of cells at preceding nodes. | ||||
| Here, we assume that each source transmits at the rate of r (0 < r < | The discussions up to now have assumed that cells within a packet | |||
| 1), in units of link speed, to the ATM switch. To capture the merging | arrive back-to-back. When traffic shaping is implemented, adjacent | |||
| and splitting of cells as they travel in the network, we will also | cells within the same packet would typically be spaced by idle slots. | |||
| assume that the cell interarrival time within a packet is randomly per- | We call such sources as "slow sources". Adjacent cells within the | |||
| turbed. To model this perturbation, we stretch the original ON period | same packet may also be perturbed and spaced as these cells travel | |||
| by 1/r, and flip a Bernoulli coin with parameter r during the | downstream due to the merging and splitting of cells at preceding | |||
| stretched ON period. In other words, a slot would contain a cell with | nodes. | |||
| probability r, and would be idle with probability 1-r during the ON | ||||
| period. By doing so, the average packet size remains the same as r is | ||||
| varied. We simulated slow sources on the VC-merge ATM switch using the | ||||
| Internet packet size distribution with r=1 and r=0.2. The packet | ||||
| interarrival time is assumed to be geometrically distributed. Reducing | ||||
| the source rate in general reduces the stresses on the ATM switches | ||||
| since the traffic becomes smoother. With VC merging, slow sources also | ||||
| have the effect of increasing the reassembly time. At utilization of | ||||
| 0.5, the reassembly time is more dominant and causes the slow source | ||||
| (with r=0.2) to require more buffering than the fast source (with | ||||
| r=1). At utilization of 0.8, the smoother traffic is more dominant | ||||
| and causes the slow source (with r=0.2) to require less buffering than | ||||
| the fast source (with r=1). This result again has practical conse- | ||||
| quences in ATM switch design where buffer dimensioning is performed at | ||||
| reasonably high utilization. In this situation, slow sources only help. | ||||
| 3.8 Packet Delay | Here, we assume that each source transmits at the rate of r_s (0 < | |||
| r_s < 1), in units of link speed, to the ATM switch. To capture the | ||||
| merging and splitting of cells as they travel in the network, we will | ||||
| also assume that the cell interarrival time within a packet is ran- | ||||
| domly perturbed. To model this perturbation, we stretch the original | ||||
| ON period by 1/r_s, and flip a Bernoulli coin with parameter r_s | ||||
| during the stretched ON period. In other words, a slot would contain | ||||
| a cell with probability r_s, and would be idle with probability 1-r_s | ||||
| during the ON period. By doing so, the average packet size remains | ||||
| the same as r_s is varied. We simulated slow sources on the VC-merge | ||||
| ATM switch using the Internet packet size distribution with r_s=1 and | ||||
| r_s=0.2. The packet interarrival time is assumed to be geometrically | ||||
| distributed. Reducing the source rate in general reduces the | ||||
| stresses on the ATM switches since the traffic becomes smoother. | ||||
| With VC merging, slow sources also have the effect of increasing the | ||||
| reassembly time. At utilization of 0.5, the reassembly time is more | ||||
| dominant and causes the slow source (with r_s=0.2) to require more | ||||
| buffering than the fast source (with r_s=1). At utilization of 0.8, | ||||
| the smoother traffic is more dominant and causes the slow source | ||||
| (with r_s=0.2) to require less buffering than the fast source (with | ||||
| r_s=1). This result again has practical consequences in ATM switch | ||||
| design where buffer dimensioning is performed at reasonably high | ||||
| utilization. In this situation, slow sources only help. | ||||
| It is of interest to see the impact of cell reassembly on packet delay. | 3.8 Packet Delay | |||
| Here we consider the delay at one node only; end-to-end delays are sub- | ||||
| ject of ongoing work. We define the delay of a packet as the time | ||||
| between the arrival of the first cell of a packet at the switch and the | ||||
| departure of the last cell of the same packet. We study the average | ||||
| packet delay as a function of utilization for both VC-merging and non-VC | ||||
| merging switches for the case r=1 (back-to-back cells in a packet). | ||||
| Again, the Internet packet size distribution is used to adopt the more | ||||
| realistic scenario. The interarrival time of packets is geometrically | ||||
| distributed. Although the difference in the worst-case delay between | ||||
| VC-merging and non-VC merging can be theoretically very large, we | ||||
| observe that the difference in average delays of the two systems to be | ||||
| consistently about one average packet time for a wide range of utiliza- | ||||
| tion. The difference is due to the average time needed to reassemble a | ||||
| packet. | ||||
| To see the effect of cell spacing in a packet, we again simulate the | It is of interest to see the impact of cell reassembly on packet | |||
| average packet delay for r=0.2. We observe that the difference in | delay. Here we consider the delay at one node only; end-to-end delays | |||
| average delays of VC merging and non-VC merging increases to a few | are subject of ongoing work. We define the delay of a packet as the | |||
| packet times (approximately 20 cells at high utilization). It should be | time between the arrival of the first cell of a packet at the switch | |||
| noted that when a VC-merge capable ATM switch reassembles packets, in | and the departure of the last cell of the same packet. We study the | |||
| effect it performs the task that the receiver has to do otherwise. | average packet delay as a function of utilization for both VC-merging | |||
| >From practical point-of-view, an increase in 20 cells translates to | and non-VC merging switches for the case r_s=1 (back-to-back cells in | |||
| about 60 micro seconds at OC-3 link speed. This additional delay should | a packet). Again, the Internet packet size distribution is used to | |||
| be insignificant for most applications. For delay-sensitive traffic, | adopt the more realistic scenario. The interarrival time of packets | |||
| the additional delay can be reduced by using smaller packets. | is geometrically distributed. Although the difference in the worst- | |||
| case delay between VC-merging and non-VC merging can be theoretically | ||||
| very large, we consistently observe that the difference in average | ||||
| delays of the two systems to be consistently about one average packet | ||||
| time for a wide range of utilization. The difference is due to the | ||||
| average time needed to reassemble a packet. | ||||
| 4. Security Considerations | To see the effect of cell spacing in a packet, we again simulate the | |||
| average packet delay for r_s=0.2. We observe that the difference in | ||||
| average delays of VC merging and non-VC merging increases to a few | ||||
| packet times (approximately 20 cells at high utilization). It should | ||||
| be noted that when a VC-merge capable ATM switch reassembles packets, | ||||
| in effect it performs the task that the receiver has to do otherwise. | ||||
| From practical point-of-view, an increase in 20 cells translates to | ||||
| about 60 micro seconds at OC-3 link speed. This additional delay | ||||
| should be insignificant for most applications. | ||||
| Security considerations are not addressed in this document. | 4.0 Security Considerations | |||
| 5. Conclusion | There are no security considerations directly related to this docu- | |||
| ment since the document is concerned with the performance implica- | ||||
| tions of VC merging. There are also no known security considerations | ||||
| as a result of the proposed modification of a legacy ATM LSR to | ||||
| incorporate VC merging. | ||||
| This document has investigated the impacts of VC merging on an ATM | 5.0 Discussion | |||
| switch performance. We experimented with various traffic processes to | ||||
| understand the detailed behavior of VC-merge capable MPLS switches. Our | ||||
| main finding indicates that VC merging incurs a minimal overhead com- | ||||
| pared to non-VC merging in terms of additional buffering. Moreover, the | ||||
| overhead decreases as utilization increases, or as the traffic becomes | ||||
| more bursty. This fact has important practical consequences since | ||||
| switches are dimensioned for high utilization and stressful traffic con- | ||||
| ditions. We have considered the case where the output buffer uses a | ||||
| FIFO scheduling. Future work will focus on fair queueing and variations. | ||||
| Fair queueing essentially has the effect of spacing the incoming cells | ||||
| and increasing the number of reassembly buffers. Our earlier results | ||||
| indicate that these two factors do not have a significant impact on the | ||||
| amount of buffering. However, additional delay due to fair queueing | ||||
| requires further investigation. Network-wide performance implications | ||||
| resulting from interconnecting many VC-merge capable ATM switches also | ||||
| need further study. | ||||
| 6. Acknowledgment: | This document has investigated the impacts of VC merging on the | |||
| performance of an ATM LSR. We experimented with various traffic | ||||
| processes to understand the detailed behavior of VC-merge capable ATM | ||||
| LSRs. Our main finding indicates that VC merging incurs a minimal | ||||
| overhead compared to non-VC merging in terms of additional buffering. | ||||
| Moreover, the overhead decreases as utilization increases, or as the | ||||
| traffic becomes more bursty. This fact has important practical | ||||
| consequences since switches are dimensioned for high utilization and | ||||
| stressful traffic conditions. We have considered the case where the | ||||
| output buffer uses a FIFO scheduling. However, based on our investi- | ||||
| gation on slow sources, we believe that fair queueing will not intro- | ||||
| duce a significant impact on the additional amount of buffering. | ||||
| Others may wish to investigate this further. | ||||
| The authors thank Debasis Mitra for his penetrating questions during the | 6.0 Acknowledgement | |||
| internal talks and discussions. | ||||
| 7. References | The authors thank Debasis Mitra for his penetrating questions during | |||
| the internal talks and discussions. | ||||
| [1] P. Newman, Tom Lyon and G. Minshall, | 7.0 References | |||
| ``Flow Labelled IP: Connectionless ATM Under IP,'' | ||||
| in Proceedings of INFOCOM'96, San-Francisco, Apr. 1996. | ||||
| [2] Y. Rekhter, B. Davie, D. Katz, E. Rosen and | [1] P. Newman, Tom Lyon and G. Minshall, | |||
| G. Swallow, ``Cisco Systems' Tag Switching Architecture Overview,'' | ``Flow Labelled IP: Connectionless ATM Under IP,'' | |||
| RFC 2105, Feb. 1997. | in Proceedings of INFOCOM'96, San-Francisco, Apr. 1996. | |||
| [3] Y. Katsube, K. Nagami and H. Esaki, | [2] Y. Rekhter, B. Davie, D. Katz, E. Rosen and | |||
| ``Toshiba's Router Architecture Extensions for ATM: Overview,'' | G. Swallow, ``Cisco Systems' Tag Switching Architecture Overview,'' | |||
| RFC 2098, Feb. 1997. | RFC 2105, Feb. 1997. | |||
| [4] A. Viswanathan, N. Feldman, R. Boivie and R. Woundy, | [3] Y. Katsube, K. Nagami and H. Esaki, | |||
| ``ARIS: Aggregate Route-Based IP Switching,'' | ``Toshiba's Router Architecture Extensions for ATM: Overview,'' | |||
| Internet Draft <draft-viswanathan-aris-overview-00.txt>, Mar. 1997. | RFC 2098, Feb. 1997. | |||
| [5] R. Callon, P. Doolan, N. Feldman, A. Fredette, | [4] A. Viswanathan, N. Feldman, R. Boivie and R. Woundy, | |||
| G. Swallow and A. Viswanathan, | ``ARIS: Aggregate Route-Based IP Switching,'' | |||
| ``A Framework for Multiprotocol Label Switching,'' | Internet Draft <draft-viswanathan-aris-overview-00.txt>, Mar. 1997. | |||
| Internet Draft <draft-ietf-mpls-framework-00.txt>, May 1997. | ||||
| [6] WAN Packet Size Distribution, | [5] R. Callon, P. Doolan, N. Feldman, A. Fredette, | |||
| http://www.nlanr.net/NA/Learn/packetsizes.html. | G. Swallow and A. Viswanathan, | |||
| ``A Framework for Multiprotocol Label Switching,'' | ||||
| Internet Draft <draft-ietf-mpls-framework-00.txt>, Nov 1997. | ||||
| [7] J. Heinanen, | [6] WAN Packet Size Distribution, | |||
| ``Multiprotocol Encapsulation over ATM Adaptation Layer 5,'' | http://www.nlanr.net/NA/Learn/packetsizes.html. | |||
| RFC 1483, Jul. 1993. | ||||
| [8] P. Jacobs and P. Lewis, | [7] J. Heinanen, | |||
| ``Discrete Time Series Generated by Mixtures III: | ``Multiprotocol Encapsulation over ATM Adaptation Layer 5,'' | |||
| Autoregressive Processes (DAR(p)),'' Technical Report NPS55-78-022, | RFC 1483, Jul. 1993. | |||
| Naval Postgraduate School, 1978. | ||||
| [9] B.K. Ryu and A. Elwalid, | [8] P. Jacobs and P. Lewis, | |||
| ``The Importance of Long-Range Dependence of VBR Video Traffic | ``Discrete Time Series Generated by Mixtures III: | |||
| in ATM Traffic Engineering,'' | Autoregressive Processes (DAR(p)),'' Technical Report NPS55-78-022, | |||
| ACM SigComm'96, Stanford, CA, pp. 3-14, Aug. 1996. | Naval Postgraduate School, 1978. | |||
| Authors' Address: | [9] B.K. Ryu and A. Elwalid, | |||
| ``The Importance of Long-Range Dependence of VBR Video Traffic | ||||
| in ATM Traffic Engineering,'' | ||||
| ACM SigComm'96, Stanford, CA, pp. 3-14, Aug. 1996. | ||||
| Author Information: | ||||
| Indra Widjaja | Indra Widjaja | |||
| Fujitsu Network Communications, Inc. | Fujitsu Network Communications | |||
| 4403 Bland Road | 4403 Bland Road | |||
| Raleigh, NC 27609, USA | Raleigh, NC 27609, USA | |||
| Phone: 919 790 2037 | Phone: 919 790-2037 | |||
| Email: i_widjaja@fujitsu-fnc.com | Email: indra.widjaja@fnc.fujitsu.com | |||
| Anwar Elwalid | Anwar Elwalid | |||
| Bell Labs, Lucent Technologies | Bell Labs Lucent Technologies | |||
| 600 Mountain Ave. Rm 2C-124 | ||||
| Murray Hill, NJ 07974, USA | Murray Hill, NJ 07974, USA | |||
| Phone: 908 582-7589 | Phone: 908 582-7589 | |||
| Email: anwar@lucent.com | Email: anwar@lucent.com | |||
| End of changes. 62 change blocks. | ||||
| 375 lines changed or deleted | 390 lines changed or added | |||
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/ | ||||