Implications of Autonomy for the Expressiveness of Policy Routing

Thousands of competing autonomous systems must cooperate with each other to provide global Internet connectivity. Each autonomous system (AS) encodes various economic, business, and performance decisions in its routing policy. The current interdomain routing system enables each AS to express policy using rankings that determine how each router in the AS chooses among different routes to a destination, and filters that determine which routes are hidden from each neighboring AS. Because the Internet is composed of many independent, competing networks, the interdomain routing system should provide autonomy, allowing network operators to set their rankings independently, and to have no constraints on allowed filters. This paper studies routing protocol stability under these conditions. We first demonstrate that ldquonext-hop rankings,rdquo commonly used in practice, may not ensure routing stability. We then prove that, when providers can set rankings and filters autonomously, guaranteeing that the routing system will converge to a stable path assignment imposes strong restrictions on the rankings ASes are allowed to choose. We discuss the implications of these results for the future of interdomain routing.

[1]  Ramesh Govindan,et al.  An architecture for stable, analyzable Internet routing , 1999, IEEE Netw..

[2]  Lixin Gao,et al.  Stable Internet routing without global coordination , 2000, SIGMETRICS '00.

[3]  Nick Feamster,et al.  Correctness Properties for Internet Routing , 2005 .

[4]  João L. Sobrinho,et al.  Network routing with path vector protocols: theory and applications , 2003, SIGCOMM '03.

[5]  Deborah Estrin,et al.  Persistent route oscillations in inter-domain routing , 2000, Comput. Networks.

[6]  Jennifer Rexford,et al.  Inherently safe backup routing with BGP , 2001, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2001. Conference on Computer Communications. Twentieth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Society (Cat. No.01CH37213).

[7]  Joan Feigenbaum,et al.  Mechanism design for policy routing , 2004, PODC '04.

[8]  Randy H. Katz,et al.  Verifying Global Invariants in Multi-Provider Distributed Systems , 2004 .

[9]  Gordon T. Wilfong,et al.  The stable paths problem and interdomain routing , 2002, TNET.

[10]  Gordon T. Wilfong,et al.  On the correctness of IBGP configuration , 2002, SIGCOMM.

[11]  Yakov Rekhter,et al.  A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4) , 1994, RFC.

[12]  Vijay Ramachandran,et al.  Design principles of policy languages for path vector protocols , 2003, SIGCOMM '03.

[13]  Mohamed G. Gouda,et al.  Maximizable routing metrics , 2003, TNET.

[14]  Cengiz Alaettinoglu,et al.  Routing Policy Specification Language (RPSL) , 1998, RFC.

[15]  Nick Feamster,et al.  Guidelines for interdomain traffic engineering , 2003, CCRV.

[16]  Gordon T. Wilfong,et al.  A safe path vector protocol , 2000, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2000. Conference on Computer Communications. Nineteenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (Cat. No.00CH37064).

[17]  João L. Sobrinho,et al.  An algebraic theory of dynamic network routing , 2005, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[18]  Nick Feamster,et al.  Stable Policy Routing with Provider Independence , 2005 .

[19]  Cengiz Alaettinoglu,et al.  Route Servers for Inter-Domain Routing , 1998, Comput. Networks.

[20]  Vijay Ramachandran,et al.  Robustness of class-based path-vector systems , 2004, Proceedings of the 12th IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols, 2004. ICNP 2004..

[21]  Nick Feamster,et al.  Detecting BGP configuration faults with static analysis , 2005 .