Link State Routing, ATM Networks: Unit 03.03.03 CS 5220: Computer Communications

Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
Download as pptx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 11

Unit 03.03.

03
CS 5220:
COMPUTER COMMUNICATIONS

Link State Routing, ATM Networks


XIAOBO ZHOU, Ph.D.
Professor, Department of Computer Science
Reaction to Failure
 In distance vector routing, if a link fails
 Neighboring routers exchange routing tables
that may use failed links

 In link-state routing, if a link fails,


 Router sets link distance to infinity & floods
the network with an update packet
 All routers immediately update their link
database & recalculate their shortest paths
 Recovery very quick
Why is Link State Better?
 Fast, loopless convergence
 Support for precise metrics, and multiple metrics if
necessary (throughput, delay, cost, reliability)
 Support for multiple paths to a destination
 algorithm can be modified to find best two paths
Problem of Link State Routing
 But watch out for old update messages
 Add time stamp or sequence # to each update message
 Check whether each received update message is new
 If new, add it to database and broadcast
 If older, send update message on arriving link
Source Routing vs. H-by-H
 Source host selects path to be followed by a packet
 Strict: sequence of nodes in path inserted into header
 Loose: subsequence of nodes in path specified
 Intermediate switches read next-hop address and remove
address
 Or maintained for the reverse path
 Source routing allows the host to control the paths that its
information traverses in the network
 Potentially the means for customers to select what service
providers they use
Example

3,6,B 6,B
1,3,6,B 1 3
B
6
A
4 B
Source host
2 Destination host
5
Asynchronous Tranfer Mode (ATM)
 Packet multiplexing and switching
 Fixed-length packets: “cells”
 Connection-oriented
 Rich Quality of Service support
 Conceived as end-to-end
 Supporting wide range of services
 Real time voice and video
 Circuit emulation for digital transport
 Data traffic with bandwidth guarantees
TDM vs. Packet Multiplexing

Variable bit rate Delay Burst traffic Processing


TDM Multirate only Low, fixed Inefficient Minimal, very high
speed
Packet Easily handled Variable Efficient Header & packet
processing required

*
In mid-1980s, packet processing mainly in software and hence slow; By
late 1990s, very high speed packet processing possible
ATM: Attributes of TDM & Packet Switching

Voice 1

2
Data MUX
packets 3
Wasted bandwidth
Images 4

TDM
• Packet structure gives 3 2 1 4 3 2 1 4 3 2 1
flexibility & efficiency
ATM
• Fixed packet length 4 3 1 3 2 2 1
simplifies implementation Packet Header
and makes high speed
ATM Virtual Connections
 Virtual connections setup across network
 Connections identified by locally-defined tags
 ATM Header contains virtual connection information:
 8-bit Virtual Path Identifier Virtual paths
 16-bit Virtual Channel Identifier
Physical link

Virtual channels

 Powerful traffic grooming capabilities


 Multiple VCs can be bundled within a VP
MPLS & ATM
 ATM initially touted as more scalable than packet
switching
 Advances in optical transmission proved ATM to be
the less scalable: @ 10 Gbps
 Segmentation & reassembly of messages & streams into
48-byte cell payloads difficult & inefficient
 Header must be processed every 53 bytes vs. 500 bytes on
average for packets
 MPLS (multiprotocol label switching) uses tags to
transfer packets across virtual circuits in Internet
 Adopts label switching paradigm, but variable-length
packets by packet-over-SONET encapsulation

You might also like