1 / 33

Virtual Private Network Layout

Virtual Private Network Layout. A proof of the tree conjecture on a ring network Leen Stougie Eindhoven University of Technology (TUE) & CWI, Amsterdam http://www.win.tue.nl/math/bs/spor/2004-15.pdf. Input to the VPN problem. Undirected graph G=(V,E)

ahanu
Download Presentation

Virtual Private Network Layout

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. Virtual Private Network Layout A proof of the tree conjecture on a ring network Leen Stougie Eindhoven University of Technology (TUE) & CWI, Amsterdam http://www.win.tue.nl/math/bs/spor/2004-15.pdf

  2. Input to the VPN problem • Undirected graph G=(V,E) • Subset of the vertices Wµ V (terminals) • Communication bounds on the terminals b(i) for all i2 W • Unit capacity costs on the edges c(e) for all e2 E

  3. Communication bounds and scenarios • b(i) is bound on total of incoming and outgoing communication of node v (symmetric VPN) • A valid demand scenario is symmetric matrix D=(dik)ik2 W with dii=0 satisfying dik¸ 0 8 i,k 2 W and k2 Wdik· b(i) 8 i2 W • D is the set of all valid scenarios

  4. VPN Robust optimization • Select for each pair i,k2 W a path for communication • Reserve enough capacity on the edges E • All demand in every valid communication scenario D2D can be routed on the selected paths • The total cost of reserving capacity is minimum • The paths are to be selected before seeing any communication scenario

  5. Routing variations of VPN • SPR (Single path routing) For each pair i,k2 W exactly one path Pikµ E • TTR (Terminal tree routing) SPR with for each i2 W, [k2 WPik is a tree in G • TR (Tree routing) SPR with [i,k2 W Pik is a tree in G • MPR (Multi-path routing) For each pair i,k2 W for each path P between i and k, specify fraction of communication using P

  6. Relation between the variations • Lemma: OPT(MPR) · OPT(SPR) · OPT(TTR) · OPT(TR) Proof: SPR is the MPR problem with the extra restriction that all fractions must be 0 or 1. The other inequalities are similarly trivial.

  7. The open VPN-problem • Conjecture 1: SPR 2 P (polynomially solvable) • Conjecture 2: OPT(SPR)=OPT(TR) • Conjecture 3: OPT(MPR)=OPT(TR)

  8. What do we know about VPN? • TR 2 P Kumar et al. 2002 • OPT(TR)= OPT(TTR) Gupta et al. 2001 • OPT(TR)· 2OPT(MPR) Gupta et al. 2001 • MPR 2 P Erlebach and Ruegg 2004, Altin et al. 2004, Hurkens et al. 2004

  9. The asymmetric VPN b+(v) outgoing communication bound b-(v) incoming communication bound • TR is NP-hard Gupta et al. 2001 • TR 2 P if v2 Wb-(v)= v2 Wb+(v) Italiano et al. 2002 • MPR 2 P Erlebach and Ruegg 2004, Altin et al. 2004, Hurkens et al. 2004 • Constant Aprroximation ratios for SPR Gupta et al. 2001, Eisenbrandt et al. 2005 (randomized)

  10. Conjecture 3 is true: • If G is a tree (trivial) • If G is K4 • If G is a cycle !!!! • If G is a 1-sum of graphs for which Conjecture 3 is true

  11. Path-formulation of VPN Pik set of paths in G between i and k P set of all paths in G For each path p in G we define xp For all i and k 2 W, p2 Pikxp=1 • SPR: xp2 {0,1} 8p2 P • MPR: 0· xp· 1 8p2 P

  12. The capacity problem • Given selected paths: given values for x(p) • Problem: find capacities on edges z(e) 8 e2 E • ep=1 if e2P and 0 otherwise

  13. Dual of the capacity finding problem

  14. Path-formulation of SPR • SPR: Find x(p) minimizing e2 Eceze

  15. Path-formulation of MPR • MPR: SPR with x(p)¸ 0 i.o. x(p)2 {0,1}

  16. Dual of the Path-formulation of MPR Dual-MPR

  17. MPR and TR • OPT(MPR)· OPT(TR) • Weak duality: any feasible (, ) has ik· OPT(MPR) • Conjecture 3: OPT(MPR)=OPT(TR) • Conjecture 3: OPT(TR)=Optimal solution value of the dual of MPR

  18. Optimal solution of TR (1) Notation b(U)=v2 U b(v) Take tree T Each e2 T is cut in T splitting V in L(e) and R(e) Direct e to minimum of b(L(e)) and b(R(e)) • There is a unique vertex r with indegree 0, root • Cost of T: emin{b(Le),b(Re)} c(e) • The minimum cost tree with r as the root is the shortest path tree from r in G w.r.t. length function c • OPT(TR) can be found in polynomial time

  19. Optimal solution of TR (2) Let dG(u,v) the distance between u and v in G w.r.t. length function c The cost of optimal tree T is given by v b(v) dT(r,v) for some root vertex r. Moreover, it is bounded from below by v b(v) dG(r,v). Clearly it is bounded from above by v b(v) dT(u,v) forall u2V Compute shortest path tree rooted at u for all u2V and select the one with minumum cost solves OPT(TR) in polynomial time

  20. Conjecture 3 true for the cycle Lemma: If Conjecture 3 is true for any cycle with: - W=V • b(v)=18 v2 V • |V| is even Then Conjecture 3 is true for any cycle Theorem: Conjecture 3 is true for any even cycle with the above three properties

  21. The even cycle (1) • Vertices 0,1,2,...,2n-1 • Edges e1,e2,...,e2n • Cost of tree by deleting edge ek: • (using emin{b(Le),b(Re)} c(e)) • We show there exist a dual solution with value equal to minek

  22. The even cycle (2) • MPR-dual restricitions for even cycle with b(v)=1 • Only two possible paths between each pair of vertices

  23. The even cycle (3)The Tool Lemma • The Tool Lemma: - Let G=(V,E) even circuit - b´ 1. - F µ E, F; Then there exist :E! R+,  not equal 0, and K such that • support()µF • 8 f2 F: K=C(f;)=mine2 E C(e; ) • There is a dual solution (, ) with value K for the MPR-dual problem with cost function 

  24. The even cycle (4)Part of Proof of Tool Lemma • Proof:By induction on |F| • |F|=1 (easy): F={ek} • Take k=1 and i=0 8i k • Clearly, mine2 EC(e; )=C(ek; )=0 • A feasible dual solution with value 0 is eih=0, ih=0 8e2 E 8i,h 2 V

  25. The even cycle (5)Part of Proof of Tool Lemma • Proof (continued): |F|>1 • Case (i): There is a k such that ek2 F and its opposite edge ek+n2 F • (in figure read ek=a and ek+n=b)

  26. Choose k=k+n=1 and i=0 8 i k,n+k ) C(e;)=n 8e2 E Choose Verify that ij=n

  27. The even cycle (6) • Theorem: Let G=(V,E) be an even circuit, c: E!R+ and b(v)=1 8v2 V. Then the cost of an optimal tree solution equals the value of an optimal dual solution. • Proof:An inductive primal-dual argument using the Tool Lemma. (By request on the blackboard)

  28. Postlude • OPT(MPR)=OPT(TR) for any graph? • SPR polynomially solvable for any graph? • Proof for the cycle is complicated! • Is there an easier proof for the cycle? • The crucial insight? • Complexity of the non-robust MPR-problem is also open!

More Related