1 / 14

Cabo: Concurrent Architectures are Better than One

Cabo: Concurrent Architectures are Better than One. Nick Feamster, Georgia Tech Lixin Gao, UMass Amherst Jennifer Rexford, Princeton. Today: ISPs Serve Two Roles. Role 1: Infrastructure Providers. Role 2: Service Providers.

glynis
Download Presentation

Cabo: Concurrent Architectures are Better than One

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Cabo: Concurrent Architectures are Better than One Nick Feamster, Georgia TechLixin Gao, UMass AmherstJennifer Rexford, Princeton

  2. Today: ISPs Serve Two Roles Role 1: Infrastructure Providers Role 2: Service Providers • Infrastructure providers: Maintain routers, links, data centers, other physical infrastructure • Service providers: Offer services (e.g., layer 3 VPNs, performance SLAs, etc.) to end users No single party has control over an end-to-end path.

  3. Coupling Causes Problems • Deployment stalemates:Secure routing, multicast, etc. • Focus on incremental deployability cripples us • Shrinking profits and commoditization: ISPs cannot enhance end-to-end service • No single ISP has purview over an entire path “How do you think they're going to get to customers? Through a broadband pipe.. we have spent this capital and we have to have a return … there's going to have to be some mechanism for these people who use these pipes to pay for the portion they're using.” –Edward Witacre • Peering Tiffs: End-to-end connectivity is in the balance “As of 5:30 am EDT, October 5th, [2005], Level(3) terminated peering with Cogent without cause…even though both Cogent and Level(3) remained in full compliance …We are extending a special offering to single homed Level 3 customers. Cogent will offer any Level 3 customer, who is single homed to the Level 3 network on the date of this notice, one year of full Internet transit free of charge at the same bandwidth currently being supplied by Level 3. …”

  4. Proposal: Concurrent Architectures are Better than One (“Cabo”) • The business entities that play these two roles may be the same in some cases • Infrastructure providers: maintain physical infrastructure needed to build networks • Service providers:lease “slices” of physical infrastructure from one or more providers

  5. Similar Trends in Other Industries • Commercial aviation • Infrastructure providers: Airports • Infrastructure: Gates, “hands and eyes”, etc. • Service providers: Airlines BOS ORD SFO ATL • Other examples: Automobile industry

  6. The Internet is not a plane.

  7. Communications Networks, Too! Two commercial examples • Packet Fabric: share routers at exchange points • FON: resells users’ wireless Internet connectivity Broker • Infrastructure providers: Buy upstream connectivity, broker access through wireless • Nomads: Users who connect to access points • Service provider: FON as broker

  8. Application #1: End-to-End Services • Secure routing protocols • Multi-provider VPNs • Paths with end-to-end performance guarantees Today Cabo Competing ISPs with different goals must coordinate Single service provider controls end-to-end path

  9. NYC Tokyo ATL Application #2: Virtual Co-Location • Problem: ISP/Enterprise wants presence in some physical location, but doesn’t have equipment there. • Today: Backhaul, or L3 VPN from single ISP • Cabo: Lease a slice of another’s routers, links

  10. Challenge #1: Simultaneous Operation • Problem: Service providers must share infrastructure • Approach: Virtualize the infrastructure • Nodes (lessons from PlanetLab will help) • Links (previous lessons in QoS?) • Tomorrow’s talk on VINI • Cabo will exploit many of the same functions that are needed for VINI • Cabo philosophy: virtualization is the architecture

  11. Challenge #2: Substrate • Problem: Service providers must be able to request/create physical infrastructure • Discovering physical infrastructure • Decision elements (cf. 4D proposal) • Creating virtual networks • Requests to decision elements (initially out of band), which name virtual network components • Instantiating virtual networks • Challenges include embeddingand accounting

  12. Economic Questions • Being a service provider: a great deal • Opportunity to add value by creating new services • Infrastructure providers • Profit margins may be low • Back to CLEC/DSL battles? • Who will become infrastructure providers?

  13. Partial Wish List • Router virtualization • Scheduling of node CPU, link bandwidth, etc. • Programmable software in each slice • Service providers will customize • Support for substrate • “Out-of-band” communication • Accounting features

  14. Summary • ISPs are infrastructure + service providers --- Problematic • Deployment stalemate • Commoditization • Cabo: “Concurrent Architectures are Better than One” • Separate infrastructure from service providers • Applications • Multi-provider VPNs, end-to-end services and protocols, … • Challenges • Simultaneous operation • Bootstrapping More Information: http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~feamster/papers/cabo.pdf

More Related