T6b
Interior vs. Exterior Protocols
- Interior Protocols:
- Can be Link State (LS) or Distance Vector (DV).
- May have access to perfect information.
- Scalability needs are limited.
- Focus on finding the shortest path.
- Changes need to propagate quickly.
- Exterior Protocols:
- Distance Vector-ish (DV).
- Perfect information is impossible.
- Scalability is crucial.
- "Shortest" is more flexible, considering policies.
- Changes propagate more carefully.
Hierarchical Routing
- Scaling Problems:
- Growing routing tables.
- Increasing routing computation.
- Expanding forwarding tables.
- Network Aggregation:
- LAN prefixes already aggregate subnets.
- No need to advertise every single host on a LAN.
- Treat a group of subnets as a larger subnet.
- Example: Adjacent /24s within a /16 (150.203.aaa.bbb).
- Geographical aggregation.
Routing to a Region
- Aggregation:
- Aggregate nodes/subnets to hide internal complexity.
- Results in shorter tables.
- Downside:
- Less optimal paths.
- Example: Full path 1A to 5C [1B] = 5 hops vs. Hierarchical path 1A to 5C [1C] = 6 hops.
Routing to a Region (Outside View)
- Outside a Region:
- Routers know one route to reach the region.
- All hosts are aggregated, reducing communication and computation.
- Inside a Region:
- More than one route in/out of a region may exist.
- Local router makes decisions on how to enter/exit the region.
- A region provides context and designates border routers.
- Internal arrangements are made within the region.
Policy-Based Routing and Routing Policies
- Core of the Internet:
- Multiple ISPs interconnect via Internet Exchange Points (IXP).
- All entities are running a business (or a country).
*Example visual representation of the routing environment among interconnected entities
Policy Routing
- Adding Human Needs:
- Introduce policies to protocols based on factors like:
- Money
- Politics
- "Security"
- Example: National Research and Education Networks (NRENs) have an R&E traffic policy, including:
- Wholesale purchase.
- Not competing with commercial providers.
- Social good.
- Introduce policies to protocols based on factors like:
National Research and Education Networks (NRENs)
- Diagram illustrating peering and transit relationships among various entities (Microsoft, Google, Amazon, Universities, Cultural institutions, Instruments, GÉANT).
Costs and Shortest Path
- Local Priority:
- Each ISP aims to offload traffic quickly.
- Technical Term: Hot Potato Routing.
- Leads to sub-optimal shortest paths.
- Asymmetric paths.
- Hierarchy is (consciously) broken for business reasons.
Common Policies: Transiting and Peering
- ISPs (Transiting):
- Take your traffic and pass it through their network to the Internet.
- They take Internet traffic and pass it through to you.
- You pay them.
Common Policies: Transiting and Peering (cont.)
- ISPs (Peering):
- Take your traffic and pass it through to a specific network.
- Return replies.
- You cannot reach the Internet through them.
- Mutual benefit; maybe no money exchanged.
- Examples: CDN, cloud provider, NREN.
Border Gateway Protocol (BGP)
- Key Protocol:
- Main Internet routing protocol today.
- Uses TCP-based message exchanges.
- Manually configured, adjacent devices.
- Key Concepts:
- Aggregates nodes within an Autonomous System (AS) - a region, a business, an ISP.
- Identifies Border Routers (or Gateways) which run BGP.
- Edge: separates interior and exterior routing protocols (Intradomain vs. Interdomain, Enterprise vs. Wide-Area).
- Builds BGP tables which populate forwarding/routing tables.
BGP: Distance Vector (DV) vs. Link State (LS)
- Path Vector:
- BGP is more of a path vector protocol than a distance vector protocol.
- Announcements:
- IP Prefix(es), Next Hop.
- Path: list of AS’s to transit.
- Allows loop detection and removal.
- No explicit distance indications.
- Multi-protocol capable.
IXPs
- Links to relevant resources provided
BGP Route Advertisements Example
- Diagram illustrating BGP route advertisements with prefixes, AS paths, and next hops for different Autonomous Systems
BGP Example Advertisement
- Listing of BGP advertisement examples including Rank, AS, Description, prefix, and AS Path. Example:
- 128.6.0.0/16 4608 7575 11537 10466 46
Policy Implementation
- Configuration:
- Configure route advertisements.
- Border routers advertise available paths with policy constraints.
- Advertisements are sent only to AS’s that may use them.
- Actions:
- Can weight or prepend AS paths.
- Filter out paths that cannot be used.
- Offer transit/peering selectively.
- Provide faster/slower paths based on $$$.
- Listening:
- Border routers listen for available paths and pick the most suitable one.
- Criteria:
- Loop detection/avoidance.
- Shortest, cheapest, trustworthy, friendly, safe, politically/contractually-suitable.
- Human-driven optimization.
- Advertise the chosen path as appropriate.
BGP Example
- Diagram illustrating businesses and their BGP relationships; AS1 is selling transit to AS2, AS3, and AS4; AS2 and AS3 are peering, as are AS3 and AS4; AS2 is selling transit to customer A.
BGP Advertisements
- Example Advertisements:
- AS2 to AS1: I have a Customer: [A, (AS2), router2U]
- AS1 to AS2: I offer Transit: [B,(AS1,AS3), router1L] and [C,(AS1,AS4), router1L]
- AS3 to AS2: I offer Peer: [B,(AS3), router3L]
- AS2 to AS3: [A,(AS2), router2R]
- Letters indicate U=up L=left R=right
Customer A View
- AS2 (and Customer A):
- Hears one option for reaching C: (AS1, AS4).
- (Could) hear two options for reaching B: Transit (AS1, AS3) and Peer (AS3).
- Peering traffic is usually free.
In Closing
- Routing is complex and hard.
- DV, LS, and BGP are very important.
- The Internet is large and complex.
- Policies:
- Policies are important; the Internet is also a business.
- Edge Case:
- Connecting interior and exterior routing/gateway protocols is literally an edge case (not discussed).
- Performance Challenges:
- Scalability, convergence, reliability, trustworthiness, optimization.
- All in a globally distributed, real-time, 24/7 system with billions of customers.