On the performance analysis of traffic splitting on load imbalancing and packet reordering of bursty traffic

Owing to the heterogeneity and high degree of connectivity of various networks, there likely exist multiple available paths between a source and a destination. To be able to simultaneously and efficiently use such parallel paths, it is essential to facilitate high quality network services at high speeds. So, traffic splitting, having a significant impact on quality of services (QoS), is an important means to achieve load balancing. In general, most existing models can be classified into flow-based or packet-based models. Unfortunately, both classes exhibit some drawbacks, such as low efficiency under the high variance of flow size in flow-based models and the phenomenon of packet reordering in packet-based models. In contrast, Table-based Hashing with Reassignment (THR) and Flowlet Aware Routing Engine (FLARE), both belonging to the class of flow-based models, attempt to achieve both efficient bandwidth utilization and packet order preservation. An original flow can be split into several paths. As compared to the traditional flow-based models, load balancing deviation from ideal distribution decreases while the risk of packet reordering increases. In this paper, we introduce analytical models of THR and FLARE, and derive the probabilities of traffic splitting and packet reordering for each model. Our analysis shows that FLARE is superior to THR in packet order preservation. Also, the performance of FLARE on bursty traffic is demonstrated and discussed.

[1]  Srikanth Kandula,et al.  Dynamic load balancing without packet reordering , 2007, CCRV.

[2]  Curtis Villamizar,et al.  OSPF Optimized Multipath (OSPF-OMP) , 1999 .

[3]  Giuliana Franceschinis,et al.  Multi-path continuous media streaming: what are the benefits? , 2002, Perform. Evaluation.

[4]  Vern Paxson,et al.  Framework for IP Performance Metrics , 1998, RFC.

[5]  Philip F. Chimento,et al.  IP Packet Delay Variation Metric for IP Performance Metrics (IPPM) , 2002, RFC.

[6]  David Thaler,et al.  Using name-based mappings to increase hit rates , 1998, TNET.

[7]  Ellen W. Zegura,et al.  Performance of hashing-based schemes for Internet load balancing , 2000, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2000. Conference on Computer Communications. Nineteenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (Cat. No.00CH37064).

[8]  Wolfgang Fischer,et al.  The Markov-Modulated Poisson Process (MMPP) Cookbook , 1993, Perform. Evaluation.

[9]  Kwan Lawrence Yeung,et al.  Traffic distribution over equal-cost-multi-paths , 2004, Comput. Networks.

[10]  David Thaler,et al.  Multipath Issues in Unicast and Multicast Next-Hop Selection , 2000, RFC.

[11]  Pawel Gburzynski,et al.  Load balancing for parallel forwarding , 2005, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[12]  Guanhua Yan,et al.  Packet Reordering Metrics: Some Methodological Considerations , 2006, International conference on Networking and Services (ICNS'06).

[13]  Anura P. Jayasumana,et al.  Reorder buffer-occupancy density and its application for measurement and evaluation of packet reordering , 2007, Comput. Commun..

[14]  Anura P. Jayasumana,et al.  Reordering of Packets due to Multipath Forwarding - An Analysis , 2006, 2006 IEEE International Conference on Communications.

[15]  Anura P. Jayasumana,et al.  Improved Packet Reordering Metrics , 2008, RFC.

[16]  Christian E. Hopps,et al.  Analysis of an Equal-Cost Multi-Path Algorithm , 2000, RFC.