Paper detail

Transmission Failure Analysis of Multi-Protection Routing in Data Center Networks with Heterogeneous Edge-Core Servers

The recently proposed RCube network is a cube-based server-centric data center network (DCN), including two types of heterogeneous servers, called core and edge servers. Remarkably, it takes the latter as backup servers to deal with server failures and thus achieve high availability. This paper first points out that RCube is suitable as a candidate topology of DCNs for edge computing. Three transmission types are among core and edge servers based on the demand for applications' computation and instant response. We then employ protection routing to analyze the transmission failure of RCube DCNs. Unlike traditional protection routing, which only tolerates a single link or node failure, we use the multi-protection routing scheme to improve fault-tolerance capability. To configure a protection routing in a network, according to Tapolcai's suggestion, we need to construct two completely independent spanning trees (CISTs). A logic graph of RCube, denoted by $L$-$RCube(n,m,k)$, is a network with a recursive structure. Each basic building element consists of $n$ core servers and $m$ edge servers, where the order $k$ is the number of recursions applied in the structure. In this paper, we provide algorithms to construct $\min\{n,\lfloor(n+m)/2\rfloor\}$ CISTs in $L$-$RCube(n,m,k)$ for $n+m\geqslant 4$ and $n>1$. From a combination of the multiple CISTs, we can configure the desired multi-protection routing. In our simulation, we configure up to 10 protection routings for RCube DCNs. As far as we know, in past research, there were at most three protection routings developed in other network structures. Finally, we summarize some crucial analysis viewpoints about the transmission efficiency of DCNs with heterogeneous edge-core servers from the simulation results.

preprint2021arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.