Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

New Algorithm Boosts Network Efficiency

Posted by Soulskill on from the more-is-better dept.

palegray.net writes "Researchers at the University of California have developed a new network routing algorithm that has the potential to significantly boost Internet traffic routing efficiency. This new approach focuses on the needs of dynamic networks, where connections are frequently transient. From the article: 'What the team did with their new routing algorithm, according to Savage's student Kirill Levchenko, was to reduce the "communication overhead" of route computation — by an order of magnitude.' For the technically inclined, the full research publication (PDF) is available."

10 of 114 comments (clear)

  1. nearly as good? by amnezick · · Score: 4, Interesting

    so if my packets don't make it I know why. Not a skeptic but the Internet is already barely holding together and I'm not confident that "nearly as good" routing info can help. Of course if trying 2-3 times using this is still faster than first time hit using the old one then sure, why not?

    --
    mov ax,4c00h
    int 21h
  2. Is this really new? by Mezoth · · Score: 5, Interesting

    So, from reading the article, I see that the great leap forward here is "smaller routing domain in a link-state protocol leads to faster routing updates". But, looking at the existing link-state protocols, they were designed from the ground up with the ability to limit your routing domain manually so increase the convergence time and decrease memory footprint.

    I guess that means the achievement here is to have a link-state protocol that automatically limits your routing domain by limiting propagation of routes. This however seems like it could lead to seriously suboptimal routing which is probably a bad idea in most network environments today.

    1. Re:Is this really new? by nine-times · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Ok, you seem to know what the hell is going on, so I'll ask you.

      The summary talks about it being a huge boost to network efficiency and how it cuts overhead, but it seems like that wouldn't necessarily make a huge difference for most people's network use unless overhead is large and networks are hugely inefficient. I mean, if overhead is .0001%, then cutting it in half isn't going to give you too much of a boost in your ability to transmit data unless you're pushing around huge amounts of data and really need to squeeze every last bit of bandwidth. Right?

      So I trust I'll get yelled at by someone if that logic is wrong, but just let me ask, what kind of benefit would this improvement actually yield? Do I get much better bandwidth, much lower latency, both? Or is it the sort of improvement than only a real network guru could love?

    2. Re:Is this really new? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      It just means that convergence time will be quicker, not necessarily related to better throughput, just better response to when things change. I do not think network convergence time is going to matter to most people. It will not speed up packets/throughput/bandwidth or lower latency it just makes the routing protocol more efficient.

      I'd imagine Cisco would stay away from this since resource hungry software drives sales.

  3. Patent? by jc42 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    So has the team applied for a patent? We wouldn't want just any ISP to be able to use this algorithm, would we? And if they don't patent it, one of the many patent-troll companies will, denying the researchers the right to use the results of their own work.

    --
    Those who do study history are doomed to stand helplessly by while everyone else repeats it.
    1. Re:Patent? by tlhIngan · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This cannot happen. Once something is published, nobody can claim a patent on it at a later date... Even for the authors to apply for a patent, the application has to predate the publication.

      Except in the US, where you have up to 1 year to file after initial public disclosure. Of course, the problem is that you can't get a foreign patent (because while the initial filing date is recognized by them, the fact it was published potentially nullifies any foreign patent. However, there are probably tons of exceptions and rules and ways for people to get around it).

      http://www.chillingeffects.org/patent/faq.cgi#QID355

  4. Re:fp by ILuvRamen · · Score: 1, Interesting

    speaking of that, we had a 7 year old cable modem and after the speed increase, it couldn't maintain that actual speed. That can't be good for the network! It was probably sending delayed and junk data nonstop when it maxed out. Our new one can do the full 8 megabits and won't jam up from p2p connections. Maybe they should find everyone with an old modem and give em a new, more efficient one

    --
    Google's Super Secret Search Algorithm: SELECT @search_results FROM internet WHERE @search_results = 'good'
  5. Re:Interesting ...I'd think it would've been... by Yvanhoe · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I take the occasion for asking : Does anyone here know of a serious study about the importance of porn traffic vs something else ? I hear often this internet meme that 90% of the traffic is porn. Once the joke is made, I find this hard to believe. Chat applications, legitimate web surfing, games, P2P, VoIP, spam, I don't see porn surpassing these in total demand.

    --
    The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
  6. Re:Interesting ...I'd think it would've been... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    I find this hard to believe. Chat applications
    chat? a bit of text = a t m o s t p e o p l e ' s t y p i n g s p e e d s... barely any impact whatsoever.

    legitimate web surfing
    again, grab a few k of pages every so often. Nothing done. (but.. see later)

    games
    now we might be getting somewhere, but games tend to be reasonably local loops (as those gamers like to brag about their ping times) and the traffic that is sent is reasonably low (or the game would be dog slow) so I don't think this is too much of a problem.

    P2P
    ahah. porn! I mean, err, downloading open source distros of course, not DVDs, no way.

    Most porn is large images, or videos, and really - video is the killer app for bandwidth consumption. How many web pages would you need to surf to make up for a single 700 Mb porn flick? How many porn images? This is why P2P is so important - I doubt you could watch a porn vid online, but downloading it for later makes much more sense.

    There is youtube, which I guess counts as websurfing nowadays, but those vids are quite heavily compressed, small and short.

    I don't know of an study of porn traffic, but it seems to me that it makes up a good chunk of traffic. Probably comes (haha) in second after downloaded Movies and music.

    Now best post this anonymously! :)

  7. Genetic Algorithm? by Tablizer · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Why not use a genetic algorithm to discover such algorithms? Assuming you can simulate typical network usage patterns reasonably accurately, then one can apply GA's to the simulation find a near-optimum algorithm.

    --
    Table-ized A.I.