A distributed control architecture of high-speed networks

Cidon, Israel; Gopal, I.; Kaplan, Marc; Kutten, Shay

doi:10.1109/26.387408

Cited by 28 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is heavily used in communication networks for computing next hop routing tables [Awerbuch et al 1990a;Cidon et al 1995a;Humblet and Soloway 1989;McQuillan et al 1980;Tanenbaum 2002]. Moreover, when a node has learned the network graph, the node can perform any sequential graph algorithm on that graph.…”

Section: :7mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Optimal maintenance of a spanning tree

Awerbuch

Cidon

Kutten

2008

J. ACM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, we show that keeping track of history enables significant improvements in the communication complexity of dynamic network protocols. We present a communication optimal maintenance of a spanning tree in a dynamic network. The amortized (on the number of topological changes) message complexity is O(V ), where V is the number of nodes in the network. The message size used by the algorithm is O(log |ID|) where |ID| is the size of the name space of the nodes.Previous algorithms that adapt to dynamic networks involved (E) messages per topological change-inherently paying for re-computation of the tree from scratch.Spanning trees are essential components in many distributed algorithms. Some examples include broadcast (dissemination of messages to all network nodes), multicast, reset (general adaptation of static algorithms to dynamic networks), routing, termination detection, and more. Thus, our efficient maintenance of a spanning tree implies the improvement of algorithms for these tasks. Our results are obtained using a novel technique to save communication. A node uses information received in the past in order to deduce present information from the fact that certain messages were NOT sent by the node's neighbor. This technique is one of our main contributions.

show abstract

Section: :7mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…One of them is to overcome a potentially fatal case of failure: that of a loss of nodes' memory (and consequently, forgetting the highest-used counter values). Another is the difficulty of handling such counters in a specialized hardware switch in fast networks [Cidon et al 1995a]. Bounded counters are also useful for self stabalization.…”

Section: :7mentioning

confidence: 99%

Optimal maintenance of a spanning tree

Awerbuch

Cidon

Kutten

2008

J. ACM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…There, the tree is given in a distributed manner, such that every vertex marks locally some of its own emanating edges, and the collection of the marked edges (of all the nodes) is the tree, see e.g. [5,6,13]. Computing such a tree distributively requires a computation that involves all the network nodes, and involves messages sent to remote nodes and waiting for replies.…”

Section: Background and Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distributed verification of minimum spanning trees

2007

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The problem of verifying a Minimum Spanning Tree (MST) was introduced by Tarjan in a sequential setting. Given a graph and a tree that spans it, the algorithm is required to check whether this tree is an MST. This paper investigates the problem in the distributed setting, where the input is given in a distributed manner, i.e., every node "knows" which of its own emanating edges belong to the tree. Informally, the distributed MST verification problem is the following. Label the vertices of the graph in such a way that for every node, given (its own state and label and) the labels of its neighbors only, the node can detect whether these edges are indeed its MST edges. In this paper, we present such a verification scheme with a maximum label size of O(log n log W ), where n is the number of nodes and W is the largest weight of an edge. We also give a matching lower bound of (log n log W ) (as long as W > (log n) 1+ for some fixed > 0). Both our bounds improve previously known bounds for the problem.For the related problem of tree sensitivity also presented by Tarjan, our method yields rather efficient schemes for both the distributed and the sequential settings.

show abstract

“…There, the tree is given in a distributed manner, such that every vertex marks locally some of its own emanating edges, and the collection of the marked edges (of all the nodes) is the tree, see e.g. [4,10,3]. Computing such a tree distributively requires a computation that involves all the network nodes, and involves messages sent to remote nodes and waiting for replies.…”

Section: Background and Motivationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Distributed verification of minimum spanning trees

Korman

Kutten

2006

Proceedings of the Twenty-Fifth Annual ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The problem of verifying a Minimum Spanning Tree (MST) was introduced by Tarjan in a sequential setting. Given a graph and a tree that spans it, the algorithm is required to check whether this tree is an MST. This paper investigates the problem in the distributed setting, where the input is given in a distributed manner, i.e., every node "knows" which of its own emanating edges belong to the tree. Informally, the distributed MST verification problem is the following. Label the vertices of the graph in such a way that for every node, given its own label and the labels of its neighbors only, the node can detect whether these edges are indeed its MST edges. In this paper we present such a verification scheme with a maximum label size of O(log n log W ), where n is the number of nodes and W is the largest weight of an edge. We also give a matching lower bound of Ω(log n log W ) (except when W ≤ log n). Both our bounds improve previously known bounds for the problem.For the related problem of tree sensitivity also presented by Tarjan, our method yields rather efficient schemes for both the distributed and the sequential settings. Our techniques (both for the lower bound and for the upper bound) may indicate a strong relation between the fields of proof labeling schemes and implicit labeling schemes.

show abstract

A distributed control architecture of high-speed networks

Cited by 28 publications

References 19 publications

Optimal maintenance of a spanning tree

Optimal maintenance of a spanning tree

Distributed verification of minimum spanning trees

Distributed verification of minimum spanning trees

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About