On Selfish Internet Switching

We consider the problem of Internet switching, where traffic is generated by selfish users. We study a packetized traffic model, which is more realistic than the widely used fluid model. We assume that routers have FIFO buffers of bounded capacity managed by the drop-tail policy. The utility of each user depends on its transmission rate and the congestion level. Since selfish users try to maximize their own utility disregarding the system objectives, we study Nash equilibria that correspond to a steady state of the system. We quantify the degradation in the network performance called the price of anarchy resulting from such selfish behavior. We show that for a single bottleneck buffer, the price of anarchy is proportional to the number of users. Then we propose a simple modification of Random Early Detection (RED) drop policy, which reduces the price of anarchy to a constant. We demonstrate that a Nash equilibrium can be reached if all users deploy TCP Vegas as their transport protocol. We also consider some natural extension of our model including the case of multiple Quality of Service (QoS) requirements, routing on parallel links and general networks with multiple bottlenecks.

[1]  Rahul Garg,et al.  A game-theoretic approach towards congestion control in communication networks , 2002, CCRV.

[2]  Berthold Vöcking,et al.  Selfish traffic allocation for server farms , 2002, STOC '02.

[3]  V. Jacobson,et al.  Congestion avoidance and control , 1988, CCRV.

[4]  Srinivasan Seshan,et al.  Selfish behavior and stability of the internet: a game-theoretic analysis of TCP , 2002, SIGCOMM.

[5]  Berthold Vöcking,et al.  Tight bounds for worst-case equilibria , 2002, SODA '02.

[6]  J. Nash NON-COOPERATIVE GAMES , 1951, Classics in Game Theory.

[7]  Paul G. Spirakis,et al.  The structure and complexity of Nash equilibria for a selfish routing game , 2002, Theor. Comput. Sci..

[8]  Eitan Altman,et al.  On the Convergence to Nash Equilibrium in Problems of Distributed Computing , 2002, Ann. Oper. Res..

[9]  Martin Gairing,et al.  Nashification and the Coordination Ratio for a Selfish Routing Game , 2003, ICALP.

[10]  Eitan Altman,et al.  Routing into Two Parallel Links: Game-Theoretic Distributed Algorithms , 2001, J. Parallel Distributed Comput..

[11]  Dimitri P. Bertsekas,et al.  Data Networks , 1986 .

[12]  Aurel A. Lazar,et al.  On the existence of equilibria in noncooperative optimal flow control , 1995, JACM.

[13]  D. Fudenberg,et al.  The Theory of Learning in Games , 1998 .

[14]  Ashish Goel,et al.  Oblivious AQM and Nash equilibria , 2002, IEEE INFOCOM 2003. Twenty-second Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37428).

[15]  Larry L. Peterson,et al.  TCP Vegas: End to End Congestion Avoidance on a Global Internet , 1995, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun..

[16]  Yin Zhang,et al.  On selfish routing in Internet-like environments , 2003, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[17]  Scott Shenker,et al.  Making greed work in networks: a game-theoretic analysis of switch service disciplines , 1995, TNET.

[18]  Tim Roughgarden,et al.  How bad is selfish routing? , 2000, Proceedings 41st Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[19]  Ariel Orda,et al.  Competitive routing in multiuser communication networks , 1993, TNET.

[20]  Richard J. La,et al.  Optimal routing control: game theoretic approach , 1997, Proceedings of the 36th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control.

[21]  Yishay Mansour,et al.  Convergence Time to Nash Equilibria , 2003, ICALP.