1 / 17

On Inferring AS Relationships in the Internet

On Inferring AS Relationships in the Internet. Lixin Gao. Overview. Motivation AS Relationships Valley-free property Routing Table Entry patterns Algorithms for Inferring AS relationships Results. Motivation. BGP – policy based routing protocol.

pello
Download Presentation

On Inferring AS Relationships in the Internet

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. On Inferring AS Relationships in the Internet Lixin Gao Dongkee LEE (dklee@an.kaist.ac.kr)

  2. Overview. • Motivation • AS Relationships • Valley-free property • Routing Table Entry patterns • Algorithms for Inferring AS relationships • Results Dongkee LEE (dklee@an.kaist.ac.kr)

  3. Motivation • BGP – policy based routing protocol. ∴ Connectivity does not imply reachability. • Connectivity does alone cannot fully characterize the structural properties of the internet. • Commercial contractual relationships are important. Dongkee LEE (dklee@an.kaist.ac.kr)

  4. Motivation • ISP A cannot reach B via C. • End-to-End performance between A and B ? Customer pays $ its provider for connectivity to the Internet. Provider does transit traffic for its customers. Dongkee LEE (dklee@an.kaist.ac.kr)

  5. Motivation There is no publicly available information about inter-AS relationships. Data from ARIN, Internet Routing Registries (IRR) … Out of date. Dongkee LEE (dklee@an.kaist.ac.kr)

  6. Background – Routing Table • The routing table entry in AS u is determined by … • Routing_Table(u, d) = if u originates prefix d : e(u, d) – empty AS path Else : U(u, v)⊆EImport(v, u)[Export(u, v)[B(v, d)] ] Dongkee LEE (dklee@an.kaist.ac.kr)

  7. Background - AS relationships • Commercial agreement between pairs of Autonomous Systems. 1. CP: Customer-to-provider relationship. 2. PC: Provider-to-Customer relationship. AS u is a provider of AS v iff u transits traffic for v, and v does not transit traffic for u. 3. PP: Peer-to-peer relationship. AS u and v have a peering relationship iff neither u transits traffic for v nor v transits traffic for u. 4. SS: Sibling-to-sibling relationship. Dongkee LEE (dklee@an.kaist.ac.kr)

  8. Background - AS relationships • Exporting information. • Selective Export Rule. • For r which is a provider or peer route of u. • If v⊆ provider(u) or peer(u) then export(v, u)[{r }] is {} • If v⊆ customer(u) or sibling(u) then export(v, u)[{r }] is not {} Dongkee LEE (dklee@an.kaist.ac.kr)

  9. Valley-free property • After traversing a provider-to-customer or peer-to-peer edge, the AS path can not traverse a customer-to-provider or peer-to-peer edge. • AS path in any BGP routing table entry is valley-free. • Downhill path sequence of edges that are either provider-to-customer or sibling-to-sibling • Uphill path Dongkee LEE (dklee@an.kaist.ac.kr)

  10. Routing Table Entry patterns. • Uphill path (1, 2), (4, 5) • Downhill path (2, 3), (4, 5) • Uphill + downhill path • Uphill + peer-to-peer path (1, 2, 6) • Peer-to-peer edge + downhill path (2, 6, 5) • Uphill + a peer-to-peer edge + Downhill. (1, 2, 6, 5) Dongkee LEE (dklee@an.kaist.ac.kr)

  11. Heuristic Algorithms • Valley-free property. • Provider typically has a larger size than its Customer. size of an AS is related to degree in the AS graph • Top provider of an AS path is the AS with highest degree among all ASes in the path. Dongkee LEE (dklee@an.kaist.ac.kr)

  12. Infer P-C and S-S relationships Input: BGP routing table RT Output: Annotated AS graph G • Phase 1. Compute the degree for each AS. • Phase 2. Parse AS path to initialize consecutive AS pair relationship. transit[ui, ui+1] = 1 means ui+1 transit traffic for ui for as_path {u1, u2, … un} in RT : find the smallest j s.t. degree[uj] = max{degree[ui], for i in [1, n] } for i in 1 … j-1 : transit[ui, ui+1] = 1 for i in j … n-1 : transit[ui+1, ui] = 1 Dongkee LEE (dklee@an.kaist.ac.kr)

  13. Infer P-C and S-S relationships • Phase 3. Assign relationship to AS pairs. Provider provides transition service for its customers. transit[ui, ui+1] = 1 means ui+1 transit traffic for ui For each AS path (u1, u2, … un), for i in 1 … n-1 : if transit[ui, ui+1] and transit[ui+1, ui] : edge[ui, ui+1] = sibling-to-sibling elif transit[ui+1, ui] edge[ui, ui+1] = provider-to-customer elif transit[ui, ui+1] edge[ui, ui+1] = customer-to-provider Dongkee LEE (dklee@an.kaist.ac.kr)

  14. Infer P-P relationships Input: BGP routing table RT Output: Annotated AS graph G • Phase 1. Infer P-C and S-S relationships. • Phase 2. Identify AS pairs that can not have a P-P relationship. • Phase 3. Assign P-P relationship from rest of the connected AS pairs as long as the pair degree do not differ by more than R times. Dongkee LEE (dklee@an.kaist.ac.kr)

  15. Results • Verification of Inferred Relationships by AT&T • WHOIS lookup Service • 101 of the 186 inferred sibling-to-sibling relationships were confirmed. Dongkee LEE (dklee@an.kaist.ac.kr)

  16. Applications • Can help … • Construction of distance map. • Placement of the proxy or mirror site. • Load balancing and congestion avoidance. • Plan for future contractual agreements. • Reduce the effect of the misconfiguration and to debug router configuration files. Dongkee LEE (dklee@an.kaist.ac.kr)

  17. The END Dongkee LEE (dklee@an.kaist.ac.kr)

More Related