Welcome to Infoblox NetMRI Community Sign in | Join | Help
in Search

Applied Infrastructure

Update to Link-State Routing Algorithms

Network World's Tim Greene posted an article about a new algorithm, called Approximate Link State (XL), for use in link-state routing protocols.  The algorithm was developed by researchers at the University of California at San Diego.   The algorithm allows link-state protocols to determine when to not forward updates to neighbors, potentially reducing the overhead of the routing protocols.  The ACM paper on the algorithm says that it can reduce overhead by an order of magnitude.

The key concept behind the algorithm is that it reduces the need to manually configure areas within OSPF or IS-IS.  Areas are used to limit the distribution of link-state updates, reducing the total volume of updates that each individual router has to process to only those updates that occur within its area.  Are areas that important?  I've heard some senior routing protocol designers say something like:

EIGRP allows people who don't have a clue to build larger networks than OSPF, but to build a very large network you have to have a clue.

The reason for this statement is that summarization is used to limit the sizes of routing domains in order to have a large network remain stable. Areas are much like water-tight doors in ships -- they limit the scope of damage when bad things happen.  Even with XL, I would want to use areas to aid in troubleshooting and to restrict the extent of the network that is impacted by any number of routing problems.  With these other requirements driving the need to use areas, I don't see areas disappearing as a basic network design feature.  I can see that XL may allow for larger areas, potentially simplifying the design of some networks.

Another thought that I had about XL was whether the increased memory usage in routers would be worth the savings in routing overhead.  The researchers have not implemented XL within a real OSPF code base, so there is no way to judge where the tradeoff exists for memory and CPU vs routing protocol traffic overhead.  Overall, it may actually save CPU time, at the cost of some additional memory.  We'll have to see as these researchers continue their work.  It would be nice to see a follow-up paper that reports how it works in the real world.  In particular, I could see XL being a big benefit in military networks that have limited bandwidth, especially mobile networks.

  -Terry 

 

Comments

 

Terry's Blog said:

Pete Welcher at Chesapeake Netcraftsmen ( netcraftsmen.net ) informed me about the benefits of incremental

October 2, 2008 11:33 AM

About tslattery

Terry Slattery, CCIE #1026, is a senior network engineer with decades of experience in the internetworking industry. Prior to joining Chesapeake NetCraftsmen as a full time consultant, Terry was the founder and CTO of Netcordia, and inventor of NetMRI, a suite of network management products. Terry started Netcordia as a consulting company in 2000 and transitioned to a network management product company in 2003. During the consulting days, he used his network design and implementation skills to lead a team in the design and implementation of a high availability network at a brokerage clearing house. Terry is the former President and founder of Chesapeake Computer Consultants, Inc., a networking and computer systems training and consulting company. He co-invented and patented the vLab(tm) internet-based remote lab system. He is co-author of the McGraw Hill text Advanced IP Routing in Cisco Networks. Terry led the team that developed the current Cisco IOS user interface under contract to Cisco Systems. Terry is experienced in the design and installation of large TCP/IP based networks and is a successful network protocol instructor. He is the second Cisco Certified Internetworking Expert (CCIE) #1026 and the first outside of Cisco. He enjoys membership on the Vanderbilt University Engineering School’s Industrial Advisory Board and the IEEE.

This Blog

Syndication