Datacenter Traffic Control: Understanding Techniques and Trade-offs

Datacenters provide cost-effective and flexible access to scalable compute and storage resources necessary for today's cloud computing needs. A typical datacenter is made up of thousands of servers connected with a large network and usually managed by one operator. To provide quality access to the variety of applications and services hosted on datacenters and maximize performance, it deems necessary to use datacenter networks effectively and efficiently. Datacenter traffic is often a mix of several classes with different priorities and requirements. This includes user-generated interactive traffic, traffic with deadlines, and long-running traffic. To this end, custom transport protocols and traffic management techniques have been developed to improve datacenter network performance. In this tutorial paper, we review the general architecture of datacenter networks, various topologies proposed for them, their traffic properties, general traffic control challenges in datacenters and general traffic control objectives. The purpose of this paper is to bring out the important characteristics of traffic control in datacenters and not to survey all existing solutions (as it is virtually impossible due to massive body of existing research). We hope to provide readers with a wide range of options and factors while considering a variety of traffic control mechanisms. We discuss various characteristics of datacenter traffic control including management schemes, transmission control, traffic shaping, prioritization, load balancing, multipathing, and traffic scheduling. Next, we point to several open challenges as well as new and interesting networking paradigms. At the end of this paper, we briefly review inter-datacenter networks that connect geographically dispersed datacenters which have been receiving increasing attention recently and pose interesting and novel research problems.Comment: Accepted for Publication in IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorial

Endpoint-transparent Multipath Transport with Software-defined Networks

Multipath forwarding consists of using multiple paths simultaneously to transport data over the network. While most such techniques require endpoint modifications, we investigate how multipath forwarding can be done inside the network, transparently to endpoint hosts. With such a network-centric approach, packet reordering becomes a critical issue as it may cause critical performance degradation. We present a Software Defined Network architecture which automatically sets up multipath forwarding, including solutions for reordering and performance improvement, both at the sending side through multipath scheduling algorithms, and the receiver side, by resequencing out-of-order packets in a dedicated in-network buffer. We implemented a prototype with commonly available technology and evaluated it in both emulated and real networks. Our results show consistent throughput improvements, thanks to the use of aggregated path capacity. We give comparisons to Multipath TCP, where we show our approach can achieve a similar performance while offering the advantage of endpoint transparency

A Survey on the Contributions of Software-Defined Networking to Traffic Engineering

Since the appearance of OpenFlow back in 2008, software-defined networking (SDN) has gained momentum. Although there are some discrepancies between the standards developing organizations working with SDN about what SDN is and how it is defined, they all outline traffic engineering (TE) as a key application. One of the most common objectives of TE is the congestion minimization, where techniques such as traffic splitting among multiple paths or advanced reservation systems are used. In such a scenario, this manuscript surveys the role of a comprehensive list of SDN protocols in TE solutions, in order to assess how these protocols can benefit TE. The SDN protocols have been categorized using the SDN architecture proposed by the open networking foundation, which differentiates among data-controller plane interfaces, application-controller plane interfaces, and management interfaces, in order to state how the interface type in which they operate influences TE. In addition, the impact of the SDN protocols on TE has been evaluated by comparing them with the path computation element (PCE)-based architecture. The PCE-based architecture has been selected to measure the impact of SDN on TE because it is the most novel TE architecture until the date, and because it already defines a set of metrics to measure the performance of TE solutions. We conclude that using the three types of interfaces simultaneously will result in more powerful and enhanced TE solutions, since they benefit TE in complementary ways.European Commission through the Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme (GN4) under Grant 691567 Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness under the Secure Deployment of Services Over SDN and NFV-based Networks Project S&NSEC under Grant TEC2013-47960-C4-3-

RepFlow: Minimizing Flow Completion Times with Replicated Flows in Data Centers

Short TCP flows that are critical for many interactive applications in data centers are plagued by large flows and head-of-line blocking in switches. Hash-based load balancing schemes such as ECMP aggravate the matter and result in long-tailed flow completion times (FCT). Previous work on reducing FCT usually requires custom switch hardware and/or protocol changes. We propose RepFlow, a simple yet practically effective approach that replicates each short flow to reduce the completion times, without any change to switches or host kernels. With ECMP the original and replicated flows traverse distinct paths with different congestion levels, thereby reducing the probability of having long queueing delay. We develop a simple analytical model to demonstrate the potential improvement of RepFlow. Extensive NS-3 simulations and Mininet implementation show that RepFlow provides 50%--70% speedup in both mean and 99-th percentile FCT for all loads, and offers near-optimal FCT when used with DCTCP.Comment: To appear in IEEE INFOCOM 201