p






Scott Shenker and Ion Stoica

(Fall, 2010)

a
 


½ Ôill present 19 project suggestions

½ Legend: based on how well-defined projects are, not

necessary how difficult they are

½ Ôell-defined projects

½ Less-defined project

½ You need to define project

½ Need to send us a one page proposal by Sep. 22

½ Feel free to talk with us beforehand! (in fact, we insist!) 2

|
a 

½ Ôireless
½ Software-Defined Networking
½ Congestion Control
½ Security
½ Economics
½ Datacenters
½ Network architectures

Ô



m
D

  


½ Design a routing algorithm that is targeted at
networks where the link quality fluctuates rapidly
½ Fast compared to global recomputation time
½ Slow compared to packet transit times
½ Graph relatively stable (i.e., not about mobile nodes)

½ Tradeoff between efficiency and performance

½ Flooding is a baseline: inefficient, but packets arrive!

½ Are there theoretical limits on performance?

½ Is there a literature on this problem? 5

£

p
½ åow well does it work, and why?

½ Revisit SIGCOMM 2006 paper on topic

½ Performance w/ TCP and w/o TCP quite

different

½ Look at different load patterns, identify what

conditions make network coding work well
6

è
  



£


£a




½ Xuild a simple system that people can use to

manage their home network:
½ Implicit identification
½ Easy access control
½ Security measures (identify bots, limit spam, etc.)
½ Internal debugging
½ External debugging
½ Etc.

½ Not rocket science, but could be widely used!

8

*
  

£
½ Can one theoretically characterize SDN:
½ Complexity?
½ Reliability?
½ Performance?

½ Compare to current distributed approaches«

p

p

Î


 

½ Respond to Xob Xriscoe

½ In public

11

X

  

½ Can one combine the ³fairness´ religion with the

³pay-for-congestion´ religion?

½ One can consider two timescales:

½ Fairness on short timescales
½ Payment on longer timescales (for ³share´)

½ Are FQ and Kelly just extremes along a sensible

continuum?
12

„
  





½ Is the problem real?

½ Come up with another solution to the problem

1è






  


½ Decongestion: great idea whose time never came

½ Datacenters: new context where deployment

might be possible

½ Is this a good marriage of opportunity and

answer?

14



 




½ Simple method to address phishing:

½ Ask people who they think they are talking to!

½ Xuild a prototype system for this

½ Limit number of user interruptions
½ Identify what new global services are needed

16

›
 


 



 
½ Assume that every host has a secure hypervisor

½ Ôhat does that mean for security?

½ Not-a-bot
½ VDC

½ Ôhat else can we do?

½ åow would this change the world?

17

 




Ô
½ The existence of large-scale infrastructures like
Google allows us to assume that there are
Internet-scale systems that can deploy new
services.

½ åow does this change:

½ Security?
½ Deployment of new architectures?

½ Test case: deployment of flat names 18


 

£

£
 
½ Is the Google-Verizon pact a good thing?

½ Ôhat does this mean for the future of the

Internet?

½ Can you back this up with a model?

20

|
   



p


  



D 



½ Many datacenter routing topologies proposed so far
½ Portland, VL2, XCube, «
½ Compare these proposals in terms of
½ Scale and incremental scaling
½ Number of ports
½ Ôiring
½ «
½ Questions
½ Is there one answer?
½ If not, when should we use a topology and when should
we use another? 22

||
 p

  


½ TCP not adequate for datacenter environments
½ Very low latency, high link capacity, low loss rates
½ Optimize TCP or invent another flow control
protocol to
½ Reduce impact of packet loss
½ Optimize flow-start
½ «
½ You can assume router/switch support
½ See DCTCP paper at SIGCOMM¶10 for related
work 2è

p 

a
! 


  


½ Ôidely different workloads
½ Latency-bounded requests (e.g., search queries)
½ Large file transfers (e.g., data replication)
½ åow could you optimize the transport protocol if
you knew the type of traffic?
½ E.g., avoid slow-start for short latency bounded-requests
½ Ôhat would be the mechanism to pass application
³hints´ to transport layer?
½ [Optional] åow would you ³protect´ the transport
layer against misbehaving/malicious applications?
24

|m
â

  


½ QoS has mainly failed in the Internet

½ Is there a case for QoS in datacenters?

½ If yes, what is the service model?

½ Reservation?
½ (Ôeighted) Fair sharing?
½ Differentiated service?

½ Ôhat are the challenges? 25

   

"  
½ Data replication: common workload in
datacenters
½ E.g., GFS, åDFS, a block is replicated two or more
times
½ Optimize this communication pattern
½ Design a multicast solution for a small number of
receivers, e.g., no more than 10
½ Challenges:
½ Ôhich layer?
½ Flow control
½ Reliability 26

|è
£


 


X 

½ Two main communication models
½ Datagrams: each packet is individually switched
(routed)
½ Circuits: a circuit is set-up and all packets are
forwarded

½ åybrid model: burst switching

½ First packet describes how many packets are in
a burst
½ Router decides whether to forward all packets in
the burst or none of them 28

|*
p 




½ Assume
½ There is caching in every router and switch
½ 90% of traffic will be video by 201è (CISCO report)
½ Questions
½ Ôhat is the impact on backbone traffic?
½ Ôhat is the impact on ISP policies?
½ Study
½ Assume different video access patterns
½ See us for possible traces

29

£
#



½ You can either choose one of the projects we
discussed during this lecture, or come up with
your own

½ Pick your partner, and submit a one page

proposal by September 22. The proposal needs
to contain:
½ The problem you are solving
½ Your plan of attack with milestones and dates
½ Any special resources you may need
è0

|Î