This Article 
 Bibliographic References 
 Add to: 
An Extended Fault-Tolerant Link-State Routing Protocol in the Internet
October 2003 (vol. 52 no. 10)
pp. 1298-1311
Jie Wu, IEEE
Fei Dai, IEEE
Xiaola Lin, IEEE
Weijia Jia, IEEE

Abstract—Link-state routing protocols, such as OSPF and IS-IS, are widely used in the Internet today. In link-state routing protocols, global network topology information is first collected at each node. A shortest path tree (SPT) is then constructed by applying Dijkstra's shortest path algorithm at each node. Link-state protocols usually require the flooding of new information to the entire (sub)network after changes in any link state (including link faults). Narvaez et al. proposed a fault-tolerant link-state routing protocol without flooding. The idea is to construct a shortest restoration path for each unidirectional link fault. Faulty link information is distributed only to the nodes in the restoration path and only one restoration path is constructed. It is shown that this approach is loop-free. However, the Narvaez et al. approach is inefficient when a link failure is bidirectional because a restoration path is unidirectional and routing tables of nodes in the path are partially updated. In addition, two restoration paths may be generated for each bidirectional link fault. In this paper, we extend the Narvaez et al. protocol to efficiently handle a bidirectional link fault by making the restoration path bidirectional. Several desirable properties of the proposed extended routing protocol are also explored. A simulation study is conducted to compare the traditional link-state protocol, the source-tree protocol, the Narvaez et al. unidirectional restoration path protocol, and the proposed bidirectional restoration path protocol.

[1] R. Callon, Use of OSI IS-IS for Routing in TCP/IP and Dual Environments RFC-1195, 19 Dec. 1990.
[2] D.E. Comer, Internetworking with TCP/IP, vol. 1, second ed. Prentice Hall, 1991.
[3] E.W. Dijkstra, A Note on Two Problems in Conexion with Graphs Numerische Math., vol. 1, pp. 269-271, 1959.
[4] M. Faloutsos, P. Faloutsos, and C. Faloutsos, On Power-Law Relationships of the Internet Topology Proc. SIGCOMM, pp. 251-262, 1999.
[5] J.J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves and J. Behrens, Distributed, Scalable Routing Based on Vectors of Link States IEEE J. Selected Areas in Comm., vol. 13, no. 8, pp. 1383-1395, Oct. 1995.
[6] J.J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves and M. Spohn, Scalable Link-State Internet Routing Proc. IEEE Sixth Int'l Conf. Network Protocols (ICNP '98), Oct. 1998.
[7] C. Huitema, Routing in the Internet, second ed. Prentice Hall PTR, 2000.
[8] J.M. McQuillan, I. Richer, and E.C. Rosen, "The New Routing Algorithm for the Arpanet," IEEE Trans. Comm., vol. 28, no. 5, pp. 711-719, May 1980.
[9] A. Medina, A. Lakhina, I. Matta, and J. Byers, BRITE: Boston University Representative Internet Topology Generator, Mar. 2001.
[10] J. Moy, OSPF version 2 Internet Draft RFC-2178, July 1997.
[11] P. Narvaez, K.-Y. Siu, and H.-Y. Tzeng, Fault-Tolerant Routing in the Internet without Flooding Dependable Network Computing, D. Aversky, ed., pp. 193-206, Kluwer Academic, 2000.
[12] R. Perlman, A Comparison between two Routing Protocols: OSPF and IS-IS IEEE Networks, vol. 5, pp. 18-24, Sept. 1991.
[13] M. Steenstrup, Routing in Communications Networks. Prentice Hall, 1995.
[14] A.S. Tenenbaum, Computer Networks, fourth ed. Prentice Hall, 2003.

Index Terms:
Fault tolerance, link-state, Internet, loop-free, routing.
Jie Wu, Fei Dai, Xiaola Lin, Jiannong Cao, Weijia Jia, "An Extended Fault-Tolerant Link-State Routing Protocol in the Internet," IEEE Transactions on Computers, vol. 52, no. 10, pp. 1298-1311, Oct. 2003, doi:10.1109/TC.2003.1234527
Usage of this product signifies your acceptance of the Terms of Use.