Resilient network design: challenges and future directions

Tipper, David

doi:10.1007/s11235-013-9815-x

Cited by 66 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The first part of this state, (3/4/5, Pr1), signifies that the probability that nodes 3, 4 and 5 are not in the same connected components, while all connected components are connected to the boundary set, in an instance of part H, is Pr1. The next step in the decomposition series is the activation of link l = (3,5). After this step, the boundary set remains the same but the state has changed according to equation (6) and now is: {(3/4/5, (1-a l ) × Pr1), (34/5, (1-a l ) × Pr2), (35/4, a l × Pr1), (345, a l × Pr2)}.…”

Section: Decompositionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…First responders also depend on reliable communication services: they must be able to communicate with the control center and also among themselves. In [5] the complexity and challenges of providing reliable services in an evolving communications infrastructure are discussed. In [6] a set of principles for designing resilient networks is put forward, and techniques for network resilience analysis are detailed.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Comparison between Two All-Terminal Reliability Algorithms

Pino¹,

Gomes²,

Kooij³

2015

JACN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Two algorithms computing the all-terminal reliability are compared. The first algorithm uses the pathsets and cutsets of the network to find lower and upper bounds respectively. The second algorithm uses decomposition and is able to give an exact outcome. The latter approach is significantly faster and able to calculate the exact value. However, for some large networks the decomposition algorithm does not give results while the path-and cutset algorithm still returns bounds. The low computation times of the proposed decomposition algorithm make it feasible to incorporate the repeated calculation of the all-terminal reliability in new types of network analysis. Some illustrations of these analyses are provided. IndexTerms-All-terminal network reliability, decomposition, network availability, pathwidth.

show abstract

Section: Decompositionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

A Comparison between Two All-Terminal Reliability Algorithms

Pino¹,

Gomes²,

Kooij³

2015

JACN

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The problem of providing network resiliency is particularly acute at the Infrastructure Layer, due to the presence of many different types of network elements (switches, routers, gateways, communication links, etc) and the influence of a wide range of factors that cause failures. The main of these factors traditionally are [5][6][7][8][9]:…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As shown by the analysis [5,6,[9][10][11][12], fast re-routing is a sufficiently effective means of ensuring network resiliency. In the course of fast re-routing, in the case of failure of one or another network element, the transmitted packets will be almost instantaneously (not more than in 50 ms) redirected to the backup paths without waiting for the next update of the routing tables.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enhanced method of fast re-routing with load balancing in software-defined networks

Lemeshko

Yeremenko

2017

Journal of Electrical Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A two-level method of fast re-routing with load balancing in a software-defined network (SDN) is proposed. The novelty of the method consists, firstly, in the introduction of a two-level hierarchy of calculating the routing variables responsible for the formation of the primary and backup paths, and secondly, in ensuring a balanced load of the communication links of the network, which meets the requirements of the traffic engineering concept. The method provides implementation of link, node, path, and bandwidth protection schemes for fast re-routing in SDN. The separation in accordance with the interaction prediction principle along two hierarchical levels of the calculation functions of the primary (lower level) and backup (upper level) routes allowed to abandon the initial sufficiently large and nonlinear optimization problem by transiting to the iterative solution of linear optimization problems of half the dimension. The analysis of the proposed method confirmed its efficiency and effectiveness in terms of obtaining optimal solutions for ensuring balanced load of communication links and implementing the required network element protection schemes for fast re-routing in SDN.K e y w o r d s: SDN, flow-based model, fast re-routing, load balancing, link utilization, primary path, backup path, calculations hierarchy

show abstract

“…A single link failure in an optical network can have a significant impact in the carried traffic. Because many critical infrastructures depend on the correct and continuous operation of telecommunication networks, these networks must be resilient [2]. 6 The idea was originally presented at RNDM 2013 -5…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Resilient arcs and node disjointness in diverse routing

Gomes

Żotkiewicz

2014

Optical Switching and Networking

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In multi-layer networks protection can be provided at multiple layers. Hence some links at an upper layer may be resilient because they are protected at a lower layer. We will designate as resilient arc at a given layer, an arc which has some form of protection at an underlaying layer. When path diversity is used at an upper layer, and resilient arcs are taken into account, it may not be necessary for the considered paths to be fully disjoint.We solve a problem of finding the shortest node-disjoint pair of paths that can share resilient arcs. It is assumed that a network consists of a set of nodes and a set of arcs. Moreover, a number of available arcs are resilient. Our goal is to find the shortest pair of paths such that they share only those nodes that are incident to shared resilient arcs. Moreover, we assume that the resulting paths cannot contain loops, and costs of shared resilient arcs are counted only once towards the objective function.In the paper we present two novel algorithms solving the above problem, and two supporting algorithms that are utilized as subroutines. We implement the proposed algorithms and compare them to an MIP approach.

show abstract

Resilient network design: challenges and future directions

Cited by 66 publications

References 33 publications

A Comparison between Two All-Terminal Reliability Algorithms

A Comparison between Two All-Terminal Reliability Algorithms

Enhanced method of fast re-routing with load balancing in software-defined networks

Resilient arcs and node disjointness in diverse routing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About