Performance and Resource Cost Comparisons for the CBT and PIM Multicast Routing Protocols

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "Performance and Resource Cost Comparisons for the CBT and PIM Multicast Routing Protocols"

Transcription

1 Performance and Resource Cost Comparisons for the CBT and PIM Multicast Routing Protocols Tom Billhartz, J. Bibb Cain, Ellen Farrey-Goudreau, Doug Fieg Harris Corporation, Melbourne, Florida 1 Steven Batsell Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Washington, DC Abstract Researchers have proposed the Core Based Trees (CBT) and Protocol Independent Multicasting (PIM) protocols to route multicast data on internetworks. In this paper, we compare the simulated performance of CBT and PIM using the OPNET network simulation tool. Performance metrics include end-to-end delay, network resource usage, join time, the size of the tables containing multicast routing information, and the impact of the timers introduced by the protocols. We also offer suggestions to improve PIM Sparse Mode while retaining the ability to offer both shared tree and source-based tree routing. 1. Introduction Multicasting is a communications service that allows an application to efficiently transmit copies of a data packet to a set of receivers that are members of a multicast group. The group is identified by a location-independent multicast group address. Senders use this address in the destination field of the packet; multicast routers forward the packet to group members using routing table entries for this address. The entries form a tree, which may be a source-based tree or a centerbased tree depending on the multicast routing protocol. Multicast group members may be spread across separate physical networks, they may join and leave a group during the life of the group, and they may be members of multiple groups. (How members learn of the multicast group is not part of the routing protocol s function; one method is for a multicast application to advertise groups using a well-known multicast address.) 1. This work was sponsored by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) through contract number N C-2186 with the Naval Research Laboratory. Page 1

2 Since 1992, multicast routing has been performed by a multicast-capable, virtual network running on top of the internet called the Multicast Backbone (MBone) [Eri94]. The MBone uses the Distance Vector Multicast Routing Protocol (DVMRP) [Wai88] or the Multicast Extensions for Open Shortest Path First Protocol (MOSPF) [Moy94] to route multicast traffic. Common uses of multicasting include audio- and video-conferencing, Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS) activities such as tank battle simulations, and exchanging experimental data and weather maps [Eri94]. A comparison of the important features of these applications can be found in [Bil96]. DVMRP and MOSPF depend on features of underlying point-to-point (unicast) routing protocols. Efforts to remove this dependency and to develop point-to-multipoint (multicast) routing protocols that operate in a hierarchical manner with subnet multicast routing protocols led to the development of the Core Based Tree (CBT) protocol [Bal94] and the Sparse Mode of the Protocol Independent Multicasting (PIM) protocol [Dee95]. PIM and CBT are defined by Internet Drafts and are still evolving. In this paper, we describe the operation of CBT, the Dense Mode of PIM, and the Sparse Mode of PIM. We discuss the OPNET network models that we built to compare the performances of these protocols when a large number of groups and multiple senders are active simultaneously. We discuss the simulation results and related analysis. Wei and Estrin [Wei94] considered end-to-end delay, network resource usage, and traffic concentration for source-based trees and center-based trees by analyzing random graphs. This paper measures these metrics plus overhead traffic, scalability, and join time for network models running the PIM and CBT protocols. In our network models, key features of the protocols are implemented, many groups are active simultaneously, and group membership is dynamic. Page 2

3 2. Multicast Routing Protocols 2.1 Source-Based Trees and Shared Trees Data packets addressed to a multicast group may be routed on a tree that is specific to the particular sender and group or a tree that is shared by all of the senders to the group. The first approach uses a source-based tree (SBT) that is a shortest-path tree rooted at a sender. The branches of the tree are the shortest paths from the sender to each of the group members. A separate tree must be constructed for each sender to each active multicast group. A protocol that implements SBTs is the Dense Mode of PIM (PIM Dense) [Dee95]. The shared tree approach uses a single center-based tree or core-based tree to route traffic from all senders to the group. The tree is a shortest-path tree rooted at one or more predefined nodes in the network called Core nodes. A protocol based on center-based trees is CBT [Bal94]. The Sparse Mode of PIM (PIM Sparse) [Dee95] first builds a center-based shared tree for each multicast group. After a group member receives traffic over the shared tree, it may ask (though it is not required to ask) the sender to send future traffic for that group along the shortest path. This request triggers the multicast routers to construct a branch of the source-based tree for the group from the sender to the receiver. We have modeled two special cases of PIM Sparse. The first delivers all traffic over the shared tree, which we will call the shared tree case of PIM Sparse (PIM-ShT). In the second case, all group members ask to receive traffic only over source-based trees. We refer to this case (which is implemented in routers on the market) as the source-base tree case of PIM Sparse (PIM-SBT). There is currently some debate over which type of tree provides the best performance [Wei94]. Algorithms that use CBTs construct a single tree for each group, regardless of the number of senders. Because the packets are not guaranteed to travel the shortest path, one expects the end-to-end Page 3

4 delivery delay to be larger for CBT algorithms than for SBT ones. However, SBT algorithms scale poorly for large numbers of senders because the router resources required to maintain knowledge of the tree structure is considerable. 2.2 Internet Group Management Protocol (IGMP) Multicast routers connected to Local Area Networks (LANs) learn which multicast groups the hosts on the LANs wish to join using the Internet Group Management Protocol (IGMP) [Dee89]. Hosts notify the router of their group memberships and of their decisions to join or leave particular multicast groups. Routers use this information to construct multicast trees. 2.3 Core-Based Trees (CBT) Multicast Routing Protocol CBT sets up and maintains a single shared tree for every multicast group that is active in the network. When a multicast router is notified via IGMP that a local host would like to join the group, the router sends a join message for that group toward the Core node via the shortest path. A tree rooted at the Core is constructed as the acknowledgments to the join messages are processed. The resulting tree is an bidirectional, acyclic graph that reaches every group member. See Figure 1. Member of G Member of G Core Multicast Tree Network Connections Member of G Figure 1. CBT shared tree used to route all multicast traffic for group G. Page 4

5 Forwarding packets to the group members using CBT is straightforward. When a node on the tree receives a packet addressed to the group, it forwards copies of the packet on all branches of the group s tree except for the branch on which the packet arrived. Packet delivery is illustrated in Figure 2. Member of G Sender S Core Packet Delivery Network Connections Member of G Figure 2. Packet delivery for group G and sender S along the CBT shared tree. 2.4 PIM Dense Multicast Routing Protocol The PIM Dense protocol [Dee95] floods the network with data packets to set up a source-based tree for every sender to every group. Initially, these trees reach every potential receiver in the network. After receiving multicast data for group G, each router that has no members of a group G on its LANs sends prune messages towards the senders to remove unwanted branches from trees for group G. This broadcast-type behavior recurs periodically after the pruned interfaces have timed out. A tree created by PIM Dense is shown in Figure 3. Page 5

6 Member of G Sender S Multicast Tree for Sender S Network Connections Member of G Figure 3. PIM Dense multicast routing tree for sender S and group G. 2.5 PIM Sparse Multicast Routing Protocol When a new multicast group is introduced to a network that uses the PIM Sparse Protocol, a node in the network called the Rendezvous Point (RP) is assigned to the group. The RP will become the center node of a directed, shared tree for the group. (The RP performs a function similar to that of the Core node in CBT.) Each multicast router that learns via IGMP that a local host has joined group G sends a join message along the shortest path to the RP for that group. The join message triggers each router on its path to the RP to set up or update a routing entry for the shared tree for group G. The shared tree that is built by these actions is a directed tree rooted at the RP that can be used to deliver packets to each member of the group. Each new sender to a group registers with the RP. In response, the RP initiates construction of a directed source-based tree from the sender to the RP. At each router on this tree, the port leading to the RP, as well as the ports leading to branches of the shared tree that do not lead to the source, are added to the SBT routing table. Routers give precedence to source-based trees when two trees are available for the same group. See Figure 4. Page 6

7 2.5.1 Shared Tree Case of PIM Sparse (PIM-ShT) The shared tree directed away from the RP overlaid with a source-based tree from each source provides the same functionality as the simple bidirectional tree of CBT. We refer to packet delivery using these trees as the shared tree case of PIM Sparse or PIM-ShT. Member of G Sender S RP Member of G Source-Based Tree for Sender S Shared Tree for Group G Network Connection Figure 4. PIM-ShT shared tree for group G and source-based tree for sender S Source-Based Tree Case of PIM Sparse (PIM-SBT) Even if we use PIM Sparse to deliver all multicast traffic over SBTs, the trees discussed in the Section 2.5 must be constructed. Subsequently, more complicated trees are set up. Each receiver learns of senders to a group when it receives data packets on the trees described in Section 2.5. The receiver may send join messages toward specific senders to become part of the shortest-path, source-based trees rooted at those senders. The receiver must also alert routers on the shared tree that no packets from these sources should be forwarded. The switch from shared tree delivery to source-based tree delivery introduces a high degree of complexity to PIM-SBT. See Figure 5. Page 7

8 Member of G Sender S RP Member of G Source-Based Tree for Sender S Shared Tree for Group G Network Connection Figure 5. PIM-SBT shared tree for group G and source-based tree for sender S. 3. Simulation Environment 3.1 OPNET Network Models We modeled CBT, PIM Dense, the Shared Tree Case of PIM Sparse, and the Source-Based Tree Case of PIM Sparse using the OPNET network simulation tool. OPNET was selected because it allows construction of detailed protocol models. In addition, because OPNET has optimized its memory use, large networks that route many packets concurrently can be simulated efficiently. We used or modified standard OPNET process models including IP and Ethernet. We also developed new OPNET process models for the IGMP and the multicast routing protocols. Details of our models can be found in [Bil95]. We constructed three network topologies using the OPNET network simulation tool to study the multicast protocols: 1)AAI/MAGIC/ATDnet - The top level of this topology is representative of a system being constructed by a consortium of government, industry and educational team members. Link bandwidths range from 10 to 600 Mbits/second. This network is called the AAI Network in later sections. Page 8

9 The AAI/MAGIC (ACTS ATM Internetwork / Multidimensional Applications and Gigabit Internetwork Consortium) network topology integrates research projects that have influenced the fundamental attributes of the prototype of the DARPA Global Grid program. Our OPNET model of the AAI/MAGIC network contains eleven sites and is shown in Figure 6. Five of the sites are part of a star subnetwork labeled MAGIC (the icon is located in Nebraska) in Figure 6. The subnetwork labeled NRL_ATDnet connects eight federal agency sites in the Washington, DC, area in a ring configuration. It was established by ARPA and serves as a testbed for ATM and SONET technologies. Figure 6. AAI/MAGIC Network. 2) High-bandwidth mesh topology - This topology is composed of nineteen sites arranged in the grid pattern shown in Figure 7. The octagons symbolize sites. The bandwidths of the WAN links were selected to match those used in the AAI Network to permit direct comparisons with the AAI Network. This network is called the Mesh Network in later sections. Page 9

10 3)Low-bandwidth mesh topology - This topology is the grid pattern defined for the high-bandwidth mesh topology and shown in Figure 7. The bandwidths of the WAN links are set to 3 Mbits/second to introduce congested links. This network is called Stressed Mesh Network or S-Mesh in later sections. Figure 7. Mesh Network Topology In all three networks, each site consists of a WAN router connected to a site router, which in turn connects to two LAN routers. Each LAN router is connected to two host nodes via Ethernet, as shown in Figure 8. Each network has seventy-six hosts that generate multicast data traffic. Page 10

11 To WAN WAN Router Site Router LAN Routers Ethernets Hosts Hosts Figure 8. Site Topology The Mesh Network topology is highly connected and provides numerous possible tree patterns. In contrast, the AAI Network topology has two large loops that are the basis of the trees for every multicast group. This contrast tests the multicast protocols under vastly different topological conditions. The network topologies do not change during the simulations and no packets are lost. 3.2 Simulation Parameters Using OPNET, we were able to model delays due to the IP packet service rate; packet queueing at routers and hosts; propagation delays on all links; and transmission delays based on link data rate and packet size. We also modeled the size of the data packets (1824 bytes plus all appropriate header information for the application we are interested in modeling) and the size of the overhead packets defined by the protocol specifications. Because we are primarily interested in modeling the routing of packets, we chose not to model PIM and CBT processing beyond that of IP; the effect Page 11

12 of operating system overhead on delay in routers and hosts; the effect of finite size packet buffers in routers; or the effect of nonzero link error rates. In our simulations, each group was assigned a single RP or Core node selected from a set of four centrally located nodes. Each of these nodes supported approximately one-quarter of the multicast groups. The RP for a given group in a PIM Sparse simulation was placed at the same location as the Core node for that group in the CBT simulation. (Multiple Cores are supported by the CBT protocol specification. PIM supports only a single RP.) We performed twelve simulations for each combination of network and protocol. Each of the parameters in Table 1 was varied independently in the simulations. We distributed membership among 390 active multicast groups using a uniform distribution defined by the Groups per Host and Group Distribution Type parameters explained in Table 1. A given host in simulations that have common a network and common parameters but different routing protocols will join the same multicast groups at the start of the simulations. Each group member was both a sender and a receiver for the group. Group members joined and left groups throughout each simulation. Table 1: Simulation Parameters. Parameter Groups per Host Group Distribution Type Join/Leave Dynamics Traffic Generation Rate Description of Parameter and Simulation Values Used The maximum number of multicast groups to which each host can belong: 10, 20, or 30. The set of groups that hosts can join. Our model allows a host to join (a) groups with membership spread across the entire network or (b) groups with membership spread across the entire network AND groups with membership restricted to one quadrant of the network. The maximum time between consecutive changes (join or leave) in group membership at a host: 5 or 10 seconds. The times between changes (joins or leaves) were uniformly distributed between zero and this parameter. Rate of packet transmission for each group at each host. Hosts sent packets to each group at intervals determined by a Poisson distribution with mean one packet per second per group. Page 12

13 4. Experimental Results This section examines simulation results for the CBT, PIM Dense, and two special cases of the PIM Sparse protocol on the AAI Network, the Mesh Network, and the Stressed Network. The metrics used to compare the protocols are discussed in Table 2. Table 2: Network Performance Metrics. Metric End-to-End Delay Network Resource Usage Overhead Traffic Percentage Traffic Concentration Implementation Issues Join Time Description Time elapsed between the generation of a packet at a source and the reception of that packet by a group member. Total number of hops that copies of a packet travel to reach all group members. Computed by dividing the total number of hops measured in a simulation (including overhead packets) by the number of packets received. The percentage of the total number of bits transmitted that are overhead bits. A measure of the distribution of the total network traffic on all links. Defined to be the ratio of the maximum throughput carried by any link to the mean throughput of all links. (1) Size of the routing table and (2) the number of required timers. These issues impact memory requirements, speed, and operating system performance. The time elapsed between when a host requests to join a group and when that host receives its first message from another member of that group. Each statistic reported in the Section 4. is the average of the twelve simulations performed for the given network and protocol. One simulation was performed for each combination of simulation parameters. 4.1 End-to-End Delay End-to-end delay is the period of time required for a data packet to be routed through the net- Page 13

14 work from the application where it was created to a destination application. The average end-toend delay measurements for each protocol and each network is shown in Figure 9. These values are normalized by the average end-to-end delay for the CBT protocol under the same test conditions for illustration purposes PIM/CBT Ratio AAI Mesh S-Mesh PIM-ShT PIM-SBT PIM-D CBT Figure 9. End-to-End Delay relative to CBT. PIM-ShT and CBT use shared trees to deliver data to multicast group members. These protocols route packets for groups with the same members and the same Core and RP nodes on identical paths. End-to-end delays for these protocols are similar. PIM-SBT and PIM Dense deliver packets 13% to 31% faster than CBT, depending on the topology simulated. These protocols use source-based trees to deliver packets along the shortest path from the source to the receivers. The largest improvements of source-based trees protocols over shared tree protocols were observed for the highly connected Mesh Networks. Page 14

15 4.2 Network Resources Usage A simple method to route a packet to all interested receivers is to unicast a copy of the packet to each receiver. However, unicasting is likely to route several copies of the same packet over network links. Multicast protocols send only a single copy of a packet over any link in the network and require fewer hops to deliver the packet than unicasting in most cases. Our simulation results were used to study which protocol delivers a copy of a packet to all group members in the fewest number of hops. We refer to the number of hops as the Network Resource Usage metric. Source-based tree protocols deliver packets along the shortest paths from the source to each receiver. Because packets travel direct paths to their destinations, the fewest number of hops are recorded for a single receiver. If multiple receivers are present in the network, packets still travel directly to each receiver. Copies of the packet are not made until the paths diverge. Shared tree protocols are expected to route packets on a common tree for greater distances. Thus, even though the packets may not travel on the shortest paths to the receivers, copies of the packets may travel fewer overall hops than source-based tree protocols to reach all of the destinations. Page 15

16 PIM/CBT Ratio AAI Mesh S-Mesh PIM-ShT PIM-SBT PIM-D CBT Figure 10. Network Resource Usage relative to CBT. The histogram shown in Figure 10 illustrates that CBT, PIM-ShT, and PIM-SBT require a similar number of hops to deliver copies of a packet to all multicast group members. The measured values displayed in Figure 10 are normalized by the measured value for CBT under the same test conditions. Table 10 shows that the network resource usage is much larger for PIM Dense than for the other protocols in all of the networks. This difference is due to periodic flooding, which almost doubled the number of data packets counted in some of our simulations. Examination of individual simulation results shows that the network resource usage of PIM Dense approaches that of CBT as the network becomes more densely populated with multicast group members. This result was expected because PIM Dense was designed for a dense membership environment. Page 16

17 4.3 Overhead Traffic Percentage Overhead messages are used to exchange IGMP information and to set up, maintain, and tear down routing trees. We measured the number of each type of packet created during each simulation -- including overhead packets -- and the number of hops that the packets traveled. From these values, we computed the percentage of bits transmitted during a simulation that were contained in overhead messages. These percentages are shown in Figure 11 for each protocol and each network. Figure 11 shows that CBT has the lowest overhead percentage of the protocols examined, approximately 0.3%. PIM-ShT also has a low overhead percentage, only 5% greater than the percentage measured for CBT. The extra overhead bits make up the packets that set up source-based trees between each sender and the RP Overhead % AAI Mesh S-Mesh PIM-ShT PIM-SBT PIM-D CBT Figure 11. Percentage of Bits Contained in Overhead Messages More complicated source-based trees are set up in PIM-SBT. In addition, each time a host asks to join (or leave) a multicast group, overhead messages must be sent to each sender to the group to Page 17

18 set up (or tear down) a branch of the multicast tree for that sender. (Only one tree needs to be updated in CBT or PIM-ShT.) These factors double the percentage of overhead bits measured for PIM-SBT compared to CBT or PIM-ShT. Due to prunes that follow flooding, the percentage of overhead bits for PIM Dense is more than double the percentage for PIM-SBT. In some simulations, the percentage of overhead messages was measured to be almost 5%. If data packets that are flooded but do not reach a multicast group member are considered overhead, the performance of PIM Dense with respect to this metric becomes much worse. In one simulation where each group had few members spread throughout the network, 43% of all network traffic (measured in bits) was overhead or unwanted flooded data. There are more paths to flood data in the highly connected Mesh Networks; thus, the overhead percentage was greater for these networks. The number of overhead messages required to maintain the routing trees for an active group depends on the number of members joining and leaving the group, not on the amount of traffic sent to that group. Thus, the overhead percentages reported would be smaller for higher levels of traffic. Because the absolute percentages are related to the level of traffic in the network, the numbers discussed here should only be used for comparison. 4.4 Traffic Concentration The ratio of the largest average throughput measured on a network link to the average throughput measured for all links, which we call the Traffic Concentration metric, can be used to examine the distribution of traffic on the links in the network. The shared tree protocols CBT and PIM-ShT are expected to concentrate traffic onto the subset of the network links that compose the shared trees. The source-based tree protocols PIM Dense and PIM-SBT are expected to distribute the traffic more evenly among all links because they use a different tree for each sender and each group. Page 18

19 Maximum-to-Mean Throughput Ratio AAI Mesh S-Mesh PIM-ShT PIM-SBT PIM-D CBT Figure 12. Traffic Concentration Metric. In the Mesh and Stressed Mesh Networks, CBT and PIM-ShT have similar Traffic Concentration Metrics, as shown in Figure 12. The metric for PIM-SBT is 17% less. PIM Dense distributes traffic most evenly among the links. Recall, however, that the overall traffic level of PIM Dense (the denominator of the ratio) is much higher. The results shown in Figure 12 for the AAI Network should not be considered representative because the link between the AAI/MAGIC Network and the ATD Network is a bottleneck link for each protocol. Every group that has a Core, RP, or member on the ATDnet and one on the AAI/ MAGIC Network must include this link in its tree. Only four nodes are used as Core and RP nodes in our simulations. A copy of each multicast data packet in CBT and PIM-ShT always passes through these of nodes, causing a concentration of traffic on the links leading to them. SBT protocols build trees rooted at each sender for every group so that traffic is not constrained to pass through a small number of nodes. This result gives Page 19

20 insight into a way that the locations of the Cores and RPs could be chosen if traffic concentration is a potential problem: allow each node to serve as Core and RP nodes for only a few multicast groups. The difference in traffic concentration metric between the shared tree and source-based tree protocols should be reduced. 4.5 Implementation Issues The OPNET model of the AAI Network was built to study the performance of a physical network that will be used for large-scale, military simulation exercises. (The physical network will have more complicated site topologies with hundreds of hosts.) These exercises are expected to be large; the STOW-97 (Synthetic Theatre of War) simulation may have 20,000 groups with several hundred members of each group. Many of these members will send to the group. The intricacy of the protocol, operating system overhead, and routing table size become especially important issues when the number of senders and groups grow to this size because router speed and memory requirements are impacted. This section analyzes the size of the routing tables needed for each protocol as a function of the number of groups and senders per group. Each routing table entry initiates at least one timer. The effect on the operating system of these timers is also considered Routing Table Size Both PIM and CBT require that each multicast router maintain a table of multicast routing information. We examine the size of the tables using the notation in Table 3. Table 3: Parameters Used to Analyze the Size of the Routing Tables for CBT and PIM Variable Meaning T(*) Average number of routing table entries in a router for protocol *. N n Number of multicast groups active in the network. Average number of senders to a group. Page 20

21 Table 3: Parameters Used to Analyze the Size of the Routing Tables for CBT and PIM Variable r α C α S d p β t f t r Meaning Total number of routers in the network. Average percentage of the routers that are on a shared tree. Also, the average percentage of the routers that are on a source-based tree for a group and a sender. Average percentage of the routers that are on the source-based tree for a group and sender but not on the shared tree for that group. Average number of hops from a host to a RP. Average number of interfaces at a router. Fraction of groups moving to SBT in PIM Sparse. Length of timer that initiates PIM-Dense flooding. Length of timer that initiates the removal of inactive PIM Dense entries <. t f CBT sets up only one tree for each group. The average number of entries that a router maintains α C is the likelihood that the router will be on a shared tree times the total number N of shared trees. T ( CBT) = N α C (1) The PIM Dense protocol sets up and maintains a source-based tree for every sender and every group. Due to the flooding of the data packets, entries are set up throughout the network. Thus, routing table entries for a group are maintained in portions of the network where no hosts are members of that group and no branches of the tree are needed. These entries are removed after a period of disuse, but re-flooding replaces them. The average number of entries in each PIM Dense router is approximated by the following expression. T ( PIM Dense) N n [ α c + ( 1 α c ) t r t f ] (2) A lower bound for this expression is given below. Page 21

22 T ( PIM Dense) N n α c (3) For comparison, we compute a lower bound on the ratio of the average number of routing tables entries needed to implement PIM Dense to the number needed for CBT. We find the routing tables in routers running PIM Dense are at least n times larger than those running CBT, on average. T ( PIM Dense) N n α c = n T ( CBT ) N α c (4) In our simulations, the ratio was even larger. When t r t f = 1 2, routing table entries existed at most routers for each active sender of every group plus some out-of-date senders whose entries had not yet timed out. PIM-ShT routes packets along shared trees as CBT does (contributing the first term of Equation 5). PIM-ShT also sets up a source-based tree between each source S and the RP. The average number of entries that a router maintains for source-based trees is the average number of hops d from a host to the RP divided by the number of routers r in the network. T ( PIM-ShT) = N α C + N n d r (5) A lower bound for this expression can be provided if every member is a sender. Every router that is on the shared tree must lie on the shortest path between a group member and the RP according to the rules for tree construction. Therefore, every router on the shared tree must be on the source-based tree that connects a sender (the group member) to the RP and must have an sourcebased tree entry. T ( PIM-ShT) 2 N α C = 2 T ( CBT) (6) T ( PIM ShT ) T ( CBT ) 2 (7) The PIM routing tables will always be at least twice the size of the CBT routing tables and Page 22

23 sometimes much larger for the same environment. These bounds are conservative for network topologies where the average number of senders to a group is greater than the number of network interfaces at the RP. Also, an entry is required for each source in the group at the RP. PIM-SBT sets up and maintains many trees for each multicast group G in the network including one source-based tree for every sender S, called the (S,G) tree, and one shared tree, called the (*,G) tree. Additional routing table entries called (S,G,RP) entries stop traffic that is delivered on sourcebased trees from being forwarded on shared trees. See reference [Dee95] for a more detailed description of these routing table entries. A router that is part of a shared tree for group G has a (*,G) entry. If the router is on a sourcebased tree for a sender S, it also has an (S,G) for sender S and group G. If the router is not on the source-based tree for sender S, it has an (S,G,RP) entry. Thus, each router on the shared tree for group G has another entry -- either an (S,G) or an (S,G,RP) entry -- for each sender to group G. T ( PIM-SBT) = N [( n + 1) α C + n α S ] (8) If only some of the groups use source-based trees, the average number of routing table entries is given by the following expression. T ( PIM-SBT) = N [( β n + 1) α C + β n αs] + ( 1 β) N n d r (9) If all PIM traffic is delivered along the shortest path ( ), the ratio of the number of routing table entries for PIM-SBT to the number for CBT is given by Equation 10. The parameter ρ is defined to be ρ = α S α C. β= 1 Page 23

24 T ( PIM SBT ) T ( CBT ) = N [( n + 1) α C + n α S ] N α C (10) = 1 + n ( ρ + 1) n + 1 On average, implementing PIM-SBT in a network will require each router to maintain at least n+1 times as many routing table entries as implementing CBT in the network Timer Requirements According to our interpretation of the PIM protocol specification, several timers are required for PIM. Both PIM Dense and PIM Sparse have two types of timers that are kept at each router. One timer is maintained for each routing table entry at the router. This timer is updated each time each entry is used. If the entry is not used for 3 minutes, the entry is deleted. The length of these timers has been reduced to 30 seconds in our simulations. For each routing table entry, one timer is kept for each output interface. In PIM Dense, when one of these timers expires for a pruned interface, the interface for which it was set is added to the entry s output interface list. In PIM Sparse, these timers are updated when routing information is exchanged by neighboring routers. The average number of timers at a router is ( 1 + p) T ( protocol). Complexity added by requiring that many PIM routing entries be maintained is compounded by requiring timers for each entry Implications of Complexity on Speed As we discussed Section 4.5, the STOW-97 exercises may have 20,000 multicast groups, each with several hundred members. As our analysis of the previous section shows, the number of routing table entries and the number of timers required to support an exercise of this size are extremely Page 24

25 large. Table 4: Average Number of Routing Table Entries Required at Each Router for β = 1, α C = 0.5, α S = 0.25, t r t f = 1/3, and d r = Protocol N=1000 n=10 Number of Groups and Senders per Group N=100 n=200 N=20,000 n=10 N=20,000 n=200 CBT ,000 10,000 PIM Dense 6, , ,000 2,670,000 PIM-SBT 8, , ,000 3,010,000 PIM-ShT 1,000 1,500 20, ,000 To illustrate how the average size of the routing tables scales with the number of groups and members, consider an example where all multicast data is delivered on SBTs ( ). (PIM Sparse routers currently being built support only the source-based tree mode.) Let α C = 0.5, α S = 0.25, and d r = These numbers are consistent with our observations of AAI Network model. Let = 1/3. Table 4 shows the growth of the routing table size with the growth t r t f in number of groups, N, and the number of members per group, n. If PIM-SBT or PIM Dense is used for the large number of senders and groups expected in STOW-97, each router will be forced to maintain a routing table whose average size may be several million entries. Routers near bottleneck and RP locations are likely to lie on many shared trees and require many more routing table entries. PIM-ShT and CBT, which deliver traffic using shared trees, require fewer routing table entries on average. For comparison, internet routers maintained routing tables for 30,000 routes at last check. β = 1 The maximum number of routes that can be supported in a network is a function of memory; thus, the amount of memory needed to store routing information cannot be overlooked when plan- Page 25

26 ning large simulations. As with any routing algorithm that relies on a table of this sort, a larger table leads to slower performance. Our simulations do not model the time required to look up the route; the packet forwarding time depends only on the size of the packet. A more complete model would consider the delay added by searching the routing table. We expect increased end-to-end delay for packets delivered by PIM. Each routing table entry set up by PIM initiates at least one timer. Because the operating system overhead impacts the performance of a router, the effect of several million timers on the operating system must be addressed. An approach used by router manufacturers to minimize the impact of the timers is to aggregate the timers in the routing daemons into a single timer. One effect of this aggregation on performance can be seen in the measured join time. 4.6 Join Time We define join time to be the time between when a host asks to join a given multicast group and the time it receives a packet addressed to that group. The mean join times measured for CBT, PIM-ShT, and PIM-SBT under in our simulations were each 230 ms. This value was highly dependent on the traffic levels. On average, 4.5 packets are created and sent for each group each second; thus, most of the measured join time is spent waiting for a packet to be created and sent to the group. If the traffic level in the network was higher, the join times would be smaller. We defined join time in this way to be consistent with measurements being taken on real networks and to be consistent among protocols. PIM Dense join times are much higher than those of the other protocols for every network. The mean join time for PIM Dense was 1.2 seconds with individual measurements as high as 40 seconds. We have traced the long join times to the behavior of our implementation of the timers that initiate flooding of data packets. Page 26

27 We cannot model the number of timers required by the PIM specification in OPNET in reasonable periods of time. We chose to consolidate the timers in each router. This deviation from the specification is not unreasonable; as we noted earlier, some router manufacturers consolidate timers in the routing daemons to minimize the impact of the timers on the operating system. However, consolidating timers did introduce long join time delays (several times the length of the timers) in both PIM Sparse and PIM Dense in initial simulations. We deactivated the timers in PIM Sparse in our final simulations, leaving outdated routing table entries in the routers. 5. Suggestions for PIM Sparse In this section, we note some features of PIM Sparse that could be altered to make the protocol more attractive for the DIS community and possibly the wider multicast community. We are not attempting to define a new protocol with all of the details required by a real protocol. We are just offering some suggestions and thoughts as to how PIM might be improved. The issues we address arise from the complex features instituted to achieve the laudable objective of being able to offer either a source-based packet delivery mode or a shared-tree mode. When using PIM-SBT, the receiver initially receives data packets from the source S for group G over the shared tree. Then, based upon some unspecified criteria, each receiver may send a request to the sender S to join the source-based tree. After receiving data on the source-based tree from S, the receiver sends a prune message up the shared tree to terminate data delivery of packets from S along the shared tree. This prune request causes complicated routing table entries to be set up to stop delivery of only the data from S along the shared tree. We recommend that the decision as to whether the source-based tree mode or shared tree mode be used be made by the group initiator rather than individually by receivers, as currently defined in the specification [Dee95]. We do not see great advantages in allowing the receivers to control Page 27

28 this choice, and it leads to considerable complexity. In almost all cases, the application and the nature of the group being initiated indicate which type of tree might be optimal. Videoconference application with a single sender would use a source-based tree; large applications such as distributed simulation would use shared trees. The approach we recommend is described briefly below. 1)The group initiator registers the group at the RP established for that group and specifies whether the traffic should be delivered using shared trees or source-based trees. 2)For shared tree groups, requests to join a group are handled in a straightforward manner much like CBT or PIM-ShT. A shared tree that is a bidirectional graph (unlike the directed graph used currently) is constructed. Senders can use this tree immediately; there is no need to require them to register at the RP or to have source-based routes established from S to the RP. Thus, there is no need to have source-based routing table entries for groups using the shared tree mode. 3)Operation of source-based tree groups could follow these steps. A receiver that joins a group that uses source-based trees sends a join message to the RP to become part of a unidirectional tree for the group rooted at the RP. (This tree is used only for overhead messages.) The RP sends the current list of senders for group G back to the receiver. New sources register with the RP. The RP multicasts the arrival of the new source to all members of group G along the tree rooted at the RP. The RP may periodically transmit a list of senders to the group to insure that the receiver knows about all current senders. The receiver requests to join the source-based trees of all senders on the list of senders. Note that the receiver communicates its intention to join group G and learns of a source S over the shared tree. Traffic is received from S only over the source-based tree. Since data is not forwarded on the tree based at the RP, no (S, G, RP) entries are needed. These modifications to the PIM protocol would keep the advantageous properties of the current Page 28

29 PIM specification. One disadvantage is the join time when using source-based trees would be longer because the receiver would not receive data from a sender until it joined the sender s sourcebased tree. The advantages of implementing these suggested changes to PIM are that the intricacy of the protocol is greatly reduced, the routing table sizes are always reduced (greatly reduced in some cases) and the number of timers required is reduced. For PIM-ShT, the table sizes and the number of timers are reduced at least by a factor of 2. The reduction is probably a great deal larger for applications with a large number of senders per group such as STOW-97. In PIM-SBT, no (S,G,RP) entries are needed along the shared trees since no traffic will be routed on these trees. This again leads to a savings in routing table size and number of timers. 6. Conclusions This paper compares the performance of the PIM and CBT protocols with respect to the metrics outlined in Section 4. These results are summarized in Table 5. PIM-SBT and PIM Dense have slightly lower end-to-end delays than CBT and PIM-ShT, but the absolute delays are all very small. Network resource usage is similar for all of the protocols except PIM Dense, which periodically floods data on the network. Traffic concentration is observed in CBT and PIM-ShT, but does not degrade performance significantly. Table 5: Comparison of Multicast Routing Protocols. Metric End-to-End Delay Network Resource Usage Protocol CBT PIM-ShT PIM-SBT PIM-Dense Low Low Low Low Moderate Moderate Moderate High in sparse group environment Page 29

30 Table 5: Comparison of Multicast Routing Protocols. Metric Protocol CBT PIM-ShT PIM-SBT PIM-Dense Overhead Traffic Percentage The size of the routing table and the impact of the timers on the operating system overhead may become a major factor. Operation of PIM-SBT or PIM Dense for a large number of members and groups requires each router to maintain large routing tables. For example, the average number of routing table entries at a single router in the STOW-97 exercises is expected to be several million entries. Routers near bottleneck locations are likely to lie on many shared trees and require many more routing table entries. Significant delay may be added each time one of these large tables is accessed. Small in the cases simulated but proportional to number of joins per second On average, PIM-ShT routers have fewer routing table entries and fewer timers than the source-based tree protocols. CBT routers have even fewer. Based on these observations, we argue that with current technology CBT is the best suited multicast protocol for environments with a large number of groups, each with many senders. Small in the cases simulated but proportional to number of joins per second Small in the cases simulated but proportional to number of joins per second High Join Time Low Low Low High on average Traffic Concentration Routing Table Size Implementation Difficulty High Highest Low Lowest Linear with the number of groups Low to Moderate Proportional to the product of number of groups and mean number of senders per group Proportional to the product of number of groups and mean number of senders per group Proportional to the product of number of groups and mean number of senders per group Complex Complex Moderate Page 30

31 Acknowledgments We would like to thank Dr. Stuart Milner of DARPA for project guidance. We would also like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable comments and suggested improvements. References [Bal94]T. Ballardie, Core Based Tree (CBT) Multicast: Architectural Overview and Specification, Internet Draft RFC, July, [Bil95]Billhartz,T., Cain, J., Farrey-Goudreau, E., Fieg, D., Batsell, S., Simulation Comparison of CBT and PIM Multicasting for Distributed Interactive Simulation (DIS), Proceedings of the 1996 Society for Computer Simulation Western Multiconference: Communications Networks Modeling and Simulation Conference, pp , January 14-17, [Bil96]Billhartz, T., Cain, J., Farrey-Goudreau, E., Fieg, D., Batsell, S., Performance and Resource Cost Comparisons for the CBT and PIM Multicast Routing Protocols in DIS Environments, Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM 96, Vol. 1, pp , March [Dee89]S. Deering, Host Extensions for IP Multicasting, Request for Comments 1112, DDN Network Information Center, August [Dee95]S. Deering, D. Estrin, D. Farinacci, V. Jacobson, C. Liu, and L. Wei, Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM): Protocol Specification, Internet Draft RFC, January 11, [Eri94]Eriksson, H. MBone: The Multicast Backbone, Communications of the ACM, Volume 37, Number 8, pp 54-60, August [Moy94]Moy, John, Multicast Routing Extensions for OSPF, Communications of the ACM, Volume 37, Number 8, pp 61-66, August [Wai88]D. Waitzman, C. Partridge, and S. Deering, Distance Vector Multicast Routing Protocol, Request for Comments 1075, DDN Network Information Center, November [Wei94]L. Wei and D. Estrin, The Trade-Offs of Multicast Trees and Algorithms, Proceedings of the 1994 International Conference on Computer Communication and Networks, September 12-14, Authors Tom Billhartz received the B.S. and M.S. degrees in electrical engineering from the University of Florida, Gainesville, in 1988 and 1990, respectively. He is currently an engineer at Harris Corporation in Melbourne, Florida, where his work includes analysis and simulation of network protocols, communication systems, and digital signal processing. J. Bibb Cain (S 64 - M 69) received the B.S.E.E., M.S.E.E., and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from the University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, in 1965, 1966, and 1969, respectively. Page 31

32 Since 1969, he has been with Harris Corporation in Melbourne, Florida, where he is a Senior Scientist. During this time, he has contributed to the development of a number of different errorcorrection decoder designs for both block (BCH and Reed--Solomon), convolutional (with sequential, threshold, and Viterbi decoders), and concatenated codes. In addition, he has worked extensively in applications of coding in a variety of systems including digital communications links such as coded spread spectrum data links, communications networks, and storage systems. More recently, his research has also included work in the areas of development of algorithms and protocols for computer and communications networks. This work included the development, performance, evaluation, and validation of link assignments, routing, and flow control protocols. He has published numerous papers on these subjects, and he has co-authored the textbook Error-Correction Coding for Digital Communications (New York: Plenum, 1981). He also holds five U.S. patents in the areas of error-correction coding and networking protocols. Dr. Cain is a member of Tau Beta Pi, Eta Kappa Nu, Sigma Xi, Phi Eta Sigma, and Pi Mu Epsilon. Ellen Farrey-Goudreau (S 88 - M 94) earned M.A. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from Princeton University in 1991 and 1994, respectively. Her research at Princeton examined properties of sampled bilinear systems. She also earned a B.S. degree in Electrical Engineering from Washington University in St. Louis is Since 1994, Dr. Farrey-Goudreau has been a member of the systems modeling and analysis group in the Communications Systems Division of Harris Corporation in Melbourne, Florida. In addition to studying the performance of multicast protocols, she has worked on adaptive control algorithms for phased array antennas and applications of fuzzy logic to radar systems. Her interests include adaptive control and analysis of nonlinear systems. She is a member of Tau Beta Pi, Eta Kappa Nu, and Pi Mu Epsilon. Page 32

! Purpose of Multicasting Routing is to reduce cost for applications that send same data to Multiple recipients.

! Purpose of Multicasting Routing is to reduce cost for applications that send same data to Multiple recipients. PAPER OVERVIEW:! Evaluation of two Multicasting protocols namely CBT and PIM.! Comparison of protocols in terms of End-to-end delay, Network resource usage, Join time, Size of the tables containing multicast

More information

Enhancement of the CBT Multicast Routing Protocol

Enhancement of the CBT Multicast Routing Protocol Enhancement of the CBT Multicast Routing Protocol Seok Joo Koh and Shin Gak Kang Protocol Engineering Center, ETRI, Korea E-mail: sjkoh@pec.etri.re.kr Abstract In this paper, we propose a simple practical

More information

What is Multicasting? Multicasting Fundamentals. Unicast Transmission. Agenda. L70 - Multicasting Fundamentals. L70 - Multicasting Fundamentals

What is Multicasting? Multicasting Fundamentals. Unicast Transmission. Agenda. L70 - Multicasting Fundamentals. L70 - Multicasting Fundamentals What is Multicasting? Multicasting Fundamentals Unicast transmission transmitting a packet to one receiver point-to-point transmission used by most applications today Multicast transmission transmitting

More information

IP Multicast Technology Overview

IP Multicast Technology Overview IP multicast is a bandwidth-conserving technology that reduces traffic by delivering a single stream of information simultaneously to potentially thousands of businesses and homes. Applications that take

More information

Multicast Routing Protocols in a Satellite Environment*

Multicast Routing Protocols in a Satellite Environment* Multicast Routing Protocols in a Satellite Environment* Nikhil Ninan and Godred Fairhurst Electronics Research Group, Department Of Engineering Aberdeen University, Scotland, AB24 3UE Email: {nikhil, gorry}

More information

Enhanced Cores Based Tree for Many-to-Many IP Multicasting

Enhanced Cores Based Tree for Many-to-Many IP Multicasting Enhanced Cores Based Tree for Many-to-Many IP Multicasting In this paper, we propose a simple and practical scheme for many-to-many IP multicasting. The proposed scheme is based on the core based tree

More information

List of groups known at each router. Router gets those using IGMP. And where they are in use Where members are located. Enhancement to OSPF

List of groups known at each router. Router gets those using IGMP. And where they are in use Where members are located. Enhancement to OSPF Multicast OSPF OSPF Open Shortest Path First Link State Protocol Use Dijkstra s algorithm (SPF) Calculate shortest path from the router to every possible destination Areas Limit the information volume

More information

Why multicast? The concept of multicast Multicast groups Multicast addressing Multicast routing protocols MBONE Multicast applications Conclusions

Why multicast? The concept of multicast Multicast groups Multicast addressing Multicast routing protocols MBONE Multicast applications Conclusions Tuomo Karhapää tuomo.karhapaa@otaverkko.fi Otaverkko Oy Why multicast? The concept of multicast Multicast groups Multicast addressing Multicast routing protocols MBONE Multicast applications Conclusions

More information

Interaction of RSVP with ATM for the support of shortcut QoS VCs: extension to the multicast case

Interaction of RSVP with ATM for the support of shortcut QoS VCs: extension to the multicast case Roberto Cocca, Stefano Salsano Interaction of RSVP with ATM for the support of shortcut QoS VCs: extension to the multicast case INFOCOM Department Report 004-004-1999 University of Rome La Sapienza Abstract

More information

Multicast Communications

Multicast Communications Multicast Communications Multicast communications refers to one-to-many or many-tomany communications. Unicast Broadcast Multicast Dragkedja IP Multicasting refers to the implementation of multicast communication

More information

Multicast Communications. Slide Set were original prepared by Dr. Tatsuya Susa

Multicast Communications. Slide Set were original prepared by Dr. Tatsuya Susa Multicast Communications Slide Set were original prepared by Dr. Tatsuya Susa Outline 1. Advantages of multicast 2. Multicast addressing 3. Multicast Routing Protocols 4. Multicast in the Internet 5. IGMP

More information

Enhancement of the CBT Multicast Routing Protocol

Enhancement of the CBT Multicast Routing Protocol Enhancement of the CBT Multicast Routing Protocol Seok Joo Koh and Shin Gak Kang Protocol Engineering Center, ETRI, Korea E- mail: sj ko h @ pcc.c t ri.rc.k Abstract In this paper, we propose a simple

More information

Multicast routing Draft

Multicast routing Draft Multicast routing Draft Lucia Tudose Nokia Research Center E-mail: tudose@research.nokia.com Abstract Multicast routing is establishing a tree which is routed from the source node and contains all the

More information

GMNF-DVMRP: AN ENHANCED VERSION OF DISTANCE VECTOR MULTICAST ROUTING PROTOCOL

GMNF-DVMRP: AN ENHANCED VERSION OF DISTANCE VECTOR MULTICAST ROUTING PROTOCOL GMNF-DVMRP: AN ENHANCED VERSION OF DISTANCE VECTOR MULTICAST ROUTING PROTOCOL YUAN-CHENG LAI YING-DAR LIN AND WEI-CHE YU Department of Computer and Information Science, National Chiao Tung University,

More information

Multicast overview. Introduction to multicast. Information transmission techniques. Unicast

Multicast overview. Introduction to multicast. Information transmission techniques. Unicast Contents Multicast overview 1 Introduction to multicast 1 Information transmission techniques 1 Multicast features 3 Common notations in multicast 4 Multicast benefits and applications 4 Multicast models

More information

Advanced Networking. Multicast

Advanced Networking. Multicast Advanced Networking Multicast Renato Lo Cigno Renato.LoCigno@dit.unitn.it Homepage: disi.unitn.it/locigno/index.php/teaching-duties/advanced-networking Multicasting Addresses that refer to group of hosts

More information

IP Multicast Technology Overview

IP Multicast Technology Overview IP multicast is a bandwidth-conserving technology that reduces traffic by delivering a single stream of information simultaneously to potentially thousands of businesses and homes. Applications that take

More information

ITEC310 Computer Networks II

ITEC310 Computer Networks II ITEC310 Computer Networks II Chapter 22 Network Layer:, and Routing Department of Information Technology Eastern Mediterranean University Objectives 2/131 After completing this chapter you should be able

More information

Multicast overview. Introduction to multicast. Information transmission techniques. Unicast

Multicast overview. Introduction to multicast. Information transmission techniques. Unicast Contents Multicast overview 1 Introduction to multicast 1 Information transmission techniques 1 Multicast features 3 Common notations in multicast 4 Multicast advantages and applications 4 Multicast models

More information

Configuring IP Multicast Routing

Configuring IP Multicast Routing 39 CHAPTER This chapter describes how to configure IP multicast routing on the Catalyst 3560 switch. IP multicasting is a more efficient way to use network resources, especially for bandwidth-intensive

More information

Contents. Overview Multicast = Send to a group of hosts. Overview. Overview. Implementation Issues. Motivation: ISPs charge by bandwidth

Contents. Overview Multicast = Send to a group of hosts. Overview. Overview. Implementation Issues. Motivation: ISPs charge by bandwidth EECS Contents Motivation Overview Implementation Issues Ethernet Multicast IGMP Routing Approaches Reliability Application Layer Multicast Summary Motivation: ISPs charge by bandwidth Broadcast Center

More information

Distributed Core Multicast (DCM): a multicast routing protocol for many groups with few receivers

Distributed Core Multicast (DCM): a multicast routing protocol for many groups with few receivers Distributed Core Multicast (DCM): a multicast routing protocol for many groups with few receivers Ljubica Blazević Jean-Yves Le Boudec Institute for computer Communications and Applications (ICA) Swiss

More information

Configuring IP Multicast Routing

Configuring IP Multicast Routing 34 CHAPTER This chapter describes how to configure IP multicast routing on the Cisco ME 3400 Ethernet Access switch. IP multicasting is a more efficient way to use network resources, especially for bandwidth-intensive

More information

Distributed Core Multicast (DCM): a multicast routing protocol for many groups with few receivers

Distributed Core Multicast (DCM): a multicast routing protocol for many groups with few receivers Distributed Core Multicast (DCM): a multicast routing protocol for many groups with few receivers Ljubica Blazević Jean-Yves Le Boudec Institute for computer Communications and Applications (ICA) Swiss

More information

Multicast EECS 122: Lecture 16

Multicast EECS 122: Lecture 16 Multicast EECS 1: Lecture 16 Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences University of California Berkeley Broadcasting to Groups Many applications are not one-one Broadcast Group collaboration

More information

IP Multicast. What is multicast?

IP Multicast. What is multicast? IP Multicast 1 What is multicast? IP(v4) allows a host to send packets to a single host (unicast), or to all hosts (broadcast). Multicast allows a host to send packets to a subset of all host called a

More information

IP Multicast. Falko Dressler Regionales Rechenzentrum Grundzüge der Datenkommunikation IP Multicast

IP Multicast. Falko Dressler Regionales Rechenzentrum Grundzüge der Datenkommunikation IP Multicast Falko Dressler Regionales Rechenzentrum falko.dressler@rrze.uni-erlangen.de 1 Agenda Basics Principles of IP multicast, addressing, TTL Internet Group Management Protocol (IGMP) IGMPv1, v2, v3 Layer-2

More information

Advanced Network Training Multicast

Advanced Network Training Multicast Division of Brocade Advanced Network Training Multicast Larry Mathews Systems Engineer lmathews@brocade.com Training Objectives Session will concentrate on Multicast with emphasis on Protocol Independent

More information

An Evaluation of Shared Multicast Trees with Multiple Active Cores

An Evaluation of Shared Multicast Trees with Multiple Active Cores Brigham Young University BYU ScholarsArchive All Faculty Publications 2001-07-01 An Evaluation of Shared Multicast Trees with Multiple Active Cores Daniel Zappala daniel_zappala@byu.edu Aaron Fabbri Follow

More information

Computer Networks. Routing

Computer Networks. Routing Computer Networks Routing Topics Link State Routing (Continued) Hierarchical Routing Broadcast Routing Sending distinct packets Flooding Multi-destination routing Using spanning tree Reverse path forwarding

More information

MULTICAST EXTENSIONS TO OSPF (MOSPF)

MULTICAST EXTENSIONS TO OSPF (MOSPF) MULTICAST EXTENSIONS TO OSPF (MOSPF) Version 2 of the Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) routing protocol is defined in RFC-1583. It is an Interior Gateway Protocol (IGP) specifically designed to distribute

More information

Network Working Group Request for Comments: 3446 Category: Informational H. Kilmer D. Farinacci Procket Networks January 2003

Network Working Group Request for Comments: 3446 Category: Informational H. Kilmer D. Farinacci Procket Networks January 2003 Network Working Group Request for Comments: 3446 Category: Informational D. Kim Verio D. Meyer H. Kilmer D. Farinacci Procket Networks January 2003 Status of this Memo Anycast Rendevous Point (RP) mechanism

More information

IPv6 and Multicast. Outline. IPv6 Multicast. S Computer Networks - Spring 2005

IPv6 and Multicast. Outline. IPv6 Multicast. S Computer Networks - Spring 2005 IPv6 and Multicast 188lecture5.ppt Pasi Lassila 1 Outline IPv6 Multicast 2 IPv6 overview Motivation Internet growth (address space depletion and routing information eplosion) CIDR has helped but eventually

More information

Design and implementation of a high performance metropolitan multicasting infrastructure

Design and implementation of a high performance metropolitan multicasting infrastructure Design and implementation of a high performance metropolitan multicasting infrastructure FRANCESCO PALMIERI Centro Servizi Didattico Scientifico Università degli studi di Napoli Federico II Complesso Universitario

More information

QoS-Aware Hierarchical Multicast Routing on Next Generation Internetworks

QoS-Aware Hierarchical Multicast Routing on Next Generation Internetworks QoS-Aware Hierarchical Multicast Routing on Next Generation Internetworks Satyabrata Pradhan, Yi Li, and Muthucumaru Maheswaran Advanced Networking Research Laboratory Department of Computer Science University

More information

3. Evaluation of Selected Tree and Mesh based Routing Protocols

3. Evaluation of Selected Tree and Mesh based Routing Protocols 33 3. Evaluation of Selected Tree and Mesh based Routing Protocols 3.1 Introduction Construction of best possible multicast trees and maintaining the group connections in sequence is challenging even in

More information

Exercises to Communication Systems

Exercises to Communication Systems Exercises to Communication Systems IP Multicast Additional Slides Dr.-Ing. Falko Dressler Department of Computer Science 7 University of Erlangen ÜKS, WS 05/06 1 IP Multicast Introduction Internet Group

More information

FSOS Multicast Configuration Guide

FSOS Multicast Configuration Guide FSOS Multicast Configuration Guide Contents 1 Configuring IP Multicast-Routing...6 1.1 Overview...6 1.2 Configuration... 6 1.3 Validation... 6 2 Configuring IGMP... 8 2.1 Overview...8 2.2 References...9

More information

ETSF10 Internet Protocols Routing on the Internet

ETSF10 Internet Protocols Routing on the Internet ETSF10 Internet Protocols Routing on the Internet 2012, Part 2, Lecture 1.2 Kaan Bür, Jens Andersson Routing on the Internet Unicast routing protocols (part 2) [ed.4 ch.22.4] [ed.5 ch.20.3] Forwarding

More information

CCNA Exploration Network Fundamentals. Chapter 06 Addressing the Network IPv4

CCNA Exploration Network Fundamentals. Chapter 06 Addressing the Network IPv4 CCNA Exploration Network Fundamentals Chapter 06 Addressing the Network IPv4 Updated: 20/05/2008 1 6.0.1 Introduction Addressing is a key function of Network layer protocols that enables data communication

More information

QoS-Aware Hierarchical Multicast Routing on Next Generation Internetworks

QoS-Aware Hierarchical Multicast Routing on Next Generation Internetworks QoS-Aware Hierarchical Multicast Routing on Next Generation Internetworks by Satyabrata Pradhan A thesis Submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the

More information

PIM Configuration. Page 1 of 9

PIM Configuration. Page 1 of 9 PIM Configuration Page 1 of 9 Contents Contents...2 Chapter 1 PIM Configuration...3 1.1 PIM Description...3 1.1.1 Principles of PIM-DM...3 1.1.2 Principles of PIM-SM...4 1.1.3 Principles of PIM-SSM...5

More information

ETSF10 Internet Protocols Routing on the Internet

ETSF10 Internet Protocols Routing on the Internet ETSF10 Internet Protocols Routing on the Internet 2013, Part 2, Lecture 1.2 Jens Andersson (Kaan Bür) Routing on the Internet Unicast routing protocols (part 2) [ed.5 ch.20.3] Multicast routing, IGMP [ed.5

More information

Table of Contents 1 PIM Configuration 1-1

Table of Contents 1 PIM Configuration 1-1 Table of Contents 1 PIM Configuration 1-1 PIM Overview 1-1 Introduction to PIM-DM 1-2 How PIM-DM Works 1-2 Introduction to PIM-SM 1-4 How PIM-SM Works 1-5 Introduction to Administrative Scoping in PIM-SM

More information

Performance Evaluation of PIM-SM Recovery

Performance Evaluation of PIM-SM Recovery Performance Evaluation of PIM-SM Recovery Tarik Čičić1, Stein Gjessing 1, and Øivind Kure 1 University of Oslo, Department of Informatics P.B. Blindern, 3 Oslo, Norway {tarikc, steing}@ifi.uio.no Norwegian

More information

Module 7 Implementing Multicast

Module 7 Implementing Multicast Module 7 Implementing Multicast Lesson 1 Explaining Multicast Why Multicast? Used when sending same data to multiple receivers Better bandwidth utilization Less host/router processing Used when addresses

More information

Financial Services Design for High Availability

Financial Services Design for High Availability Financial Services Design for High Availability Version History Version Number Date Notes 1 March 28, 2003 This document was created. This document describes the best practice for building a multicast

More information

Aggregated Multicast A Comparative Study UCLA CSD TR #

Aggregated Multicast A Comparative Study UCLA CSD TR # Aggregated Multicast A Comparative Study 1 UCLA CSD TR # 211 Jun-Hong Cui, Jinkyu Kim Dario Maggiorini, Khaled Boussetta and Mario Gerla Computer Science Department, University of California, Los Angeles,

More information

ETSF10 Internet Protocols Routing on the Internet

ETSF10 Internet Protocols Routing on the Internet ETSF10 Internet Protocols Routing on the Internet 2014, Part 2, Lecture 1.2 Jens Andersson Internet Hierarchy 2014-11-10 ETSF05/ETSF05/ETSF10 - Internet Protocols 2 Hierarchical Routing aggregate routers

More information

How did IP Multicast get so complicated?

How did IP Multicast get so complicated? How did IP Multicast get so complicated? Mark Handley ACIRI mjh@aciri.org Overview IP Multicast Service Model Multicast Addresses DVMRP (1988-1993) Broadcast and Prune PIM-DM (~1993) DVMRP for "real" routers

More information

IP Multicast: PIM Configuration Guide, Cisco IOS Release 12.4T

IP Multicast: PIM Configuration Guide, Cisco IOS Release 12.4T IP Multicast: PIM Configuration Guide, Cisco IOS Release 12.4T Americas Headquarters Cisco Systems, Inc. 170 West Tasman Drive San Jose, CA 95134-1706 USA http://www.cisco.com Tel: 408 526-4000 800 553-NETS

More information

DATA COMMUNICATOIN NETWORKING

DATA COMMUNICATOIN NETWORKING DATA COMMUNICATOIN NETWORKING Instructor: Ouldooz Baghban Karimi Course Book & Slides: Computer Networking, A Top-Down Approach By: Kurose, Ross Introduction Course Overview Basics of Computer Networks

More information

IP Multicast Optimization: Optimizing PIM Sparse Mode in a Large IP Multicast Deployment

IP Multicast Optimization: Optimizing PIM Sparse Mode in a Large IP Multicast Deployment IP Multicast Optimization: Optimizing PIM Sparse Mode in a Large IP Multicast Deployment Finding Feature Information, page 1 Prerequisites for Optimizing PIM Sparse Mode in a Large IP Multicast Deployment,

More information

ICS 351: Today's plan. routing protocol comparison encapsulation network dynamics multicasting in general IP multicasting IGMP PIM

ICS 351: Today's plan. routing protocol comparison encapsulation network dynamics multicasting in general IP multicasting IGMP PIM ICS 351: Today's plan routing protocol comparison encapsulation network dynamics multicasting in general IP multicasting IGMP PIM what routing is not: Ethernet switching does not use IP addresses in any

More information

Multicast VPN C H A P T E R. Introduction to IP Multicast

Multicast VPN C H A P T E R. Introduction to IP Multicast C H A P T E R 7 Multicast VPN Multicast is a popular feature used mainly by IP-networks of Enterprise customers. Multicast allows the efficient distribution of information between a single multicast source

More information

Broadcast and Multicast Routing

Broadcast and Multicast Routing Broadcast and Multicast Routing Daniel Zappala CS 460 Computer Networking Brigham Young University Group Communication 2/34 How can the Internet provide efficient group communication? send the same copy

More information

4.2 Multicast IP supports multicast to support one-to-many (radio, news, IP multicast was originally a many-to-many (any source MC or

4.2 Multicast IP supports multicast to support one-to-many (radio, news, IP multicast was originally a many-to-many (any source MC or CS475 Networks Lecture 14 Chapter 4 Advanced Internetworking Assignments Reading for Lecture 15: Sections 5.1-5.2 Homework 5, Wireshark Project 3 posted, due next Thursday; Programming Project 3 posted,

More information

Configuring IP Multicast Routing

Configuring IP Multicast Routing CHAPTER 46 This chapter describes how to configure IP multicast routing on the Catalyst 3750-E or 3560-E switch. IP multicasting is a more efficient way to use network resources, especially for bandwidth-intensive

More information

Supporting IP Multicast for Mobile Hosts. Yu Wang Weidong Chen. Southern Methodist University. May 8, 1998.

Supporting IP Multicast for Mobile Hosts. Yu Wang Weidong Chen. Southern Methodist University. May 8, 1998. Supporting IP Multicast for Mobile Hosts Yu Wang Weidong Chen Southern Methodist University fwy,wcheng@seas.smu.edu May 8, 1998 Abstract IP Multicast is an ecient mechanism of delivering a large amount

More information

Configuring Bidirectional PIM

Configuring Bidirectional PIM Configuring Bidirectional PIM This chapter describes how to configure the Bidirectional PIM (bidir-pim) feature. Bidir-PIM is a variant of the Protocol Independent Multicast (PIM) suite of routing protocols

More information

Aggregated Multicast A Comparative Study

Aggregated Multicast A Comparative Study Aggregated Multicast A Comparative Study Jun-Hong Cui, Jinkyu Kim Dario Maggiorini, Khaled Boussetta, and Mario Gerla Computer Science Department, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095 Abstract.

More information

Multicast Communications. Tarik Čičić, 4. March. 2016

Multicast Communications. Tarik Čičić, 4. March. 2016 Multicast Communications Tarik Čičić, 4. March. 06 Overview One-to-many communication, why and how Algorithmic approach: Steiner trees Practical algorithms Multicast tree types Basic concepts in multicast

More information

CS 268: IP Multicast Routing

CS 268: IP Multicast Routing Motivation CS 268: IP Multicast Routing Ion Stoica April 8, 2003 Many applications requires one-to-many communication - E.g., video/audio conferencing, news dissemination, file updates, etc. Using unicast

More information

IP Multicast Routing Protocols

IP Multicast Routing Protocols IP Multicast Routing Protocols Term Paper By : Priyank Porwal (97255) Course : Advanced Computer Networks (CS625) Instructor : Dr. Dheeraj Sanghi Department of CSE, IIT Kanpur. April, 2000. Table of Contents

More information

AMRIS: A Multicast Protocol for Ad hoc Wireless Networks

AMRIS: A Multicast Protocol for Ad hoc Wireless Networks of AMRIS: A Multicast Protocol for Ad hoc Wireless Networks C.W. Wu, Y.C. Tay National University of Singapore wuchunwei@alum.comp.nus.edu.sg,tay@acm.org Abstract This paper introduces AMRIS, a new multicast

More information

What is the difference between unicast and multicast? (P# 114)

What is the difference between unicast and multicast? (P# 114) 1 FINAL TERM FALL2011 (eagle_eye) CS610 current final term subjective all solved data by eagle_eye MY paper of CS610 COPUTER NETWORKS There were 30 MCQs Question no. 31 (Marks2) Find the class in 00000001.001011.1001.111

More information

Broadcast Routing. Multicast. Flooding. In-network duplication. deliver packets from source to all other nodes source duplication is inefficient:

Broadcast Routing. Multicast. Flooding. In-network duplication. deliver packets from source to all other nodes source duplication is inefficient: Broadcast Routing Multicast deliver packets from source to all other nodes source duplication is inefficient: duplicate duplicate creation/transmission duplicate source duplication in-network duplication

More information

AODV-PA: AODV with Path Accumulation

AODV-PA: AODV with Path Accumulation -PA: with Path Accumulation Sumit Gwalani Elizabeth M. Belding-Royer Department of Computer Science University of California, Santa Barbara fsumitg, ebeldingg@cs.ucsb.edu Charles E. Perkins Communications

More information

Multicast Technology White Paper

Multicast Technology White Paper Multicast Technology White Paper Keywords: Multicast, IGMP, IGMP Snooping, PIM, MBGP, MSDP, and SSM Mapping Abstract: The multicast technology implements high-efficiency point-to-multipoint data transmission

More information

ASM. Engineering Workshops

ASM. Engineering Workshops 1 ASM 2 ASM Allows SPTs and RPTs RP: Matches senders with receivers Provides network source discovery Typically uses RPT to bootstrap SPT RPs can be learned via: Static configuration recommended Anycast-RP

More information

Performance Evaluation of Mesh - Based Multicast Routing Protocols in MANET s

Performance Evaluation of Mesh - Based Multicast Routing Protocols in MANET s Performance Evaluation of Mesh - Based Multicast Routing Protocols in MANET s M. Nagaratna Assistant Professor Dept. of CSE JNTUH, Hyderabad, India V. Kamakshi Prasad Prof & Additional Cont. of. Examinations

More information

Developing IP Muiticast Networks

Developing IP Muiticast Networks Developing IP Muiticast Networks Volume I Beau Williamson Cisco SYSTEMS CISCO PRESS Cisco Press 201 West 103rd Street Indianapolis, IN 46290 USA Table of Contents Introduction xviii Part I Fundamentals

More information

Comparison of Concepts for IP Multicast over ATM. 1 Introduction. 2 IP Multicast. 3 IP-Multicast over ATM

Comparison of Concepts for IP Multicast over ATM. 1 Introduction. 2 IP Multicast. 3 IP-Multicast over ATM Comparison of Concepts for IP Multicast over ATM Torsten Braun, Stefan Gumbrich, and Heinrich J. Stüttgen IBM European Networking Center, Vangerowstr. 18, D-69115 Heidelberg E-mail: braun@heidelbg.ibm.com,

More information

IPv6 PIM-DM configuration example 36 IPv6 PIM-SM non-scoped zone configuration example 39 IPv6 PIM-SM admin-scoped zone configuration example 42 IPv6

IPv6 PIM-DM configuration example 36 IPv6 PIM-SM non-scoped zone configuration example 39 IPv6 PIM-SM admin-scoped zone configuration example 42 IPv6 Contents Configuring IPv6 PIM 1 Overview 1 IPv6 PIM-DM overview 1 IPv6 PIM-SM overview 3 IPv6 BIDIR-PIM overview 8 IPv6 administrative scoping overview 11 IPv6 PIM-SSM overview 13 Relationship among IPv6

More information

NetWare Link-Services Protocol

NetWare Link-Services Protocol 44 CHAPTER Chapter Goals Describe the Network Link-Service Protocol. Describe routing with NLSP. Describe the data packet used by NLSP. Background The (NLSP) is a link-state routing protocol from Novell

More information

II. Principles of Computer Communications Network and Transport Layer

II. Principles of Computer Communications Network and Transport Layer II. Principles of Computer Communications Network and Transport Layer A. Internet Protocol (IP) IPv4 Header An IP datagram consists of a header part and a text part. The header has a 20-byte fixed part

More information

IP Multicast Routing Technology Overview

IP Multicast Routing Technology Overview Finding Feature Information, on page 1 Information About IP Multicast Technology, on page 1 Finding Feature Information Your software release may not support all the features documented in this module.

More information

Distributed Systems Multicast & Group Communication Services

Distributed Systems Multicast & Group Communication Services Distributed Systems 600.437 Multicast & Group Communication Services Department of Computer Science The Johns Hopkins University 1 Multicast & Group Communication Services Lecture 3 Guide to Reliable Distributed

More information

IP Multicast: PIM Configuration Guide, Cisco IOS Release 15S

IP Multicast: PIM Configuration Guide, Cisco IOS Release 15S First Published: November 05, 2012 Last Modified: July 30, 2013 Americas Headquarters Cisco Systems, Inc. 170 West Tasman Drive San Jose, CA 95134-1706 USA http://www.cisco.com Tel: 408 526-4000 800 553-NETS

More information

Performance of Multihop Communications Using Logical Topologies on Optical Torus Networks

Performance of Multihop Communications Using Logical Topologies on Optical Torus Networks Performance of Multihop Communications Using Logical Topologies on Optical Torus Networks X. Yuan, R. Melhem and R. Gupta Department of Computer Science University of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh, PA 156 fxyuan,

More information

CSCE 463/612 Networks and Distributed Processing Spring 2018

CSCE 463/612 Networks and Distributed Processing Spring 2018 CSCE 463/612 Networks and Distributed Processing Spring 2018 Network Layer V Dmitri Loguinov Texas A&M University April 17, 2018 Original slides copyright 1996-2004 J.F Kurose and K.W. Ross Chapter 4:

More information

Configuring IP Multicast Routing

Configuring IP Multicast Routing CHAPTER 45 This chapter describes how to configure IP multicast routing on the Catalyst 3750 Metro switch. IP multicasting is a more efficient way to use network resources, especially for bandwidth-intensive

More information

Category: Informational Woven Systems May 2008

Category: Informational Woven Systems May 2008 Network Working Group Request for Comments: 5186 Category: Informational B. Haberman Johns Hopkins University J. Martin Woven Systems May 2008 Internet Group Management Protocol Version 3 (IGMPv3) / Multicast

More information

DD2490 p IP Multicast routing. Multicast routing. Olof Hagsand KTH CSC

DD2490 p IP Multicast routing. Multicast routing. Olof Hagsand KTH CSC DD2490 p4 2010 IP Multicast routing Multicast routing Olof Hagsand KTH CSC 1 Literature RFC 4601 Section 3 (you may need some definitions from Section 2). See reading instructions on web. 2 Deployment

More information

Tag Switching. Background. Tag-Switching Architecture. Forwarding Component CHAPTER

Tag Switching. Background. Tag-Switching Architecture. Forwarding Component CHAPTER CHAPTER 23 Tag Switching Background Rapid changes in the type (and quantity) of traffic handled by the Internet and the explosion in the number of Internet users is putting an unprecedented strain on the

More information

IPv6 PIM. Based on the forwarding mechanism, IPv6 PIM falls into two modes:

IPv6 PIM. Based on the forwarding mechanism, IPv6 PIM falls into two modes: Overview Protocol Independent Multicast for IPv6 () provides IPv6 multicast forwarding by leveraging static routes or IPv6 unicast routing tables generated by any IPv6 unicast routing protocol, such as

More information

The Performance of MANET Routing Protocols for Scalable Video Communication

The Performance of MANET Routing Protocols for Scalable Video Communication Communications and Network, 23, 5, 9-25 http://dx.doi.org/.4236/cn.23.522 Published Online May 23 (http://www.scirp.org/journal/cn) The Performance of MANET Routing Protocols for Scalable Video Communication

More information

CSE 123A Computer Networks

CSE 123A Computer Networks CSE 123A Computer Networks Winter 2005 Lecture 12 Internet Routing: Multicast Today: Multicast routing Multicast service model Host interface Host-router interactions (IGMP) Multicast Routing Limiters

More information

IP MULTICAST EXPLAINED

IP MULTICAST EXPLAINED IP MULTICAST EXPLAINED June 2004 Jon Hardwick Data Connection Ltd. Jon.Hardwick@dataconnection.com Data Connection Limited 100 Church Street Enfield, UK Tel: +44 20 8366 1177 / Copyright 2004 Data Connection

More information

Chao Li Thomas Su Cheng Lu

Chao Li Thomas Su Cheng Lu CMPT885 High-Performance Network Final Project Presentation Transport Protocols on IP Multicasting Chao Li Thomas Su Cheng Lu {clij, tmsu, clu}@cs.sfu.ca School of Computing Science, Simon Fraser University

More information

Integrated Services - Overview

Integrated Services - Overview Multicast QoS Need bandwidth/delay guarantees On many links unknown to sender Fortunately QoS development after multicast Takes multicast into account RSVP reservations from receivers toward sender rules

More information

A COMPARISON OF REACTIVE ROUTING PROTOCOLS DSR, AODV AND TORA IN MANET

A COMPARISON OF REACTIVE ROUTING PROTOCOLS DSR, AODV AND TORA IN MANET ISSN: 2278 1323 All Rights Reserved 2016 IJARCET 296 A COMPARISON OF REACTIVE ROUTING PROTOCOLS DSR, AODV AND TORA IN MANET Dr. R. Shanmugavadivu 1, B. Chitra 2 1 Assistant Professor, Department of Computer

More information

Multicast routing protocols

Multicast routing protocols Multicast routing protocols IGMP IP Group Management Protocol PIM Protocol Independent Multicast MOSPF Multicast OSPF DVMRP DV Multicast Routing Protocol E7310-Multicast-2/Comnet 1 Multicast in local area

More information

Vanguard Managed Solutions

Vanguard Managed Solutions Vanguard Managed Solutions Vanguard Applications Ware IP and LAN Feature Protocols Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) Notice 2003 Vanguard Managed Solutions, LLC 575 West Street Mansfield, Massachusetts 02048

More information

Framework for IP Multicast in Satellite ATM Networks

Framework for IP Multicast in Satellite ATM Networks 22nd AIAA International Communications Satellite Systems Conference & Exhibit 2004 9-12 May 2004, Monterey, California AIAA 2004-3176 Framework for IP Multicast in Satellite ATM Networks Ayan Roy-Chowdhury

More information

OSPF Protocol Overview on page 187. OSPF Standards on page 188. OSPF Area Terminology on page 188. OSPF Routing Algorithm on page 190

OSPF Protocol Overview on page 187. OSPF Standards on page 188. OSPF Area Terminology on page 188. OSPF Routing Algorithm on page 190 Chapter 17 OSPF Protocol Overview The Open Shortest Path First (OSPF) protocol is an interior gateway protocol (IGP) that routes packets within a single autonomous system (AS). OSPF uses link-state information

More information

Distributed Conditional Multicast Access for IP TV in High-Speed Wireless Networks (Destination Specific Multicast)

Distributed Conditional Multicast Access for IP TV in High-Speed Wireless Networks (Destination Specific Multicast) 137 Distributed Conditional Multicast Access for IP TV in High-Speed Wireless Networks (Destination Specific Multicast) 1, 2 Jan Fesl, 1 Richard Klee, 1 Marie Dolezalova 1 Institute of Applied Informatics,

More information

IP Multicast: PIM Configuration Guide, Cisco IOS Release 15M&T

IP Multicast: PIM Configuration Guide, Cisco IOS Release 15M&T First Published: 2012-11-21 Americas Headquarters Cisco Systems, Inc. 170 West Tasman Drive San Jose, CA 95134-1706 USA http://www.cisco.com Tel: 408 526-4000 800 553-NETS (6387) Fax: 408 527-0883 THE

More information

Analysis of Performance of Core Based Tree and Centralized Mode of Multicasting Routing Protocol

Analysis of Performance of Core Based Tree and Centralized Mode of Multicasting Routing Protocol International Journal of Scientific and Research Publications, Volume 3, Issue 5, May 2013 1 Analysis of Performance of Core Based Tree and Centralized Mode of Multicasting Routing Protocol Ijtaba Saleem

More information

7010INT Data Communications Lecture 7 The Network Layer

7010INT Data Communications Lecture 7 The Network Layer Introduction 7010INT Data Communications Lecture 7 The Layer Internetworking & Devices Connecting LANs Routing Backbone networks Virtual LANs Addressing Application Presentation Session Data Link Physical

More information