skip to main content
article

A system for authenticated policy-compliant routing

Published:30 August 2004Publication History
Skip Abstract Section

Abstract

Internet end users and ISPs alike have little control over how packets are routed outside of their own AS, restricting their ability to achieve levels of performance, reliability, and utility that might otherwise be attained. While researchers have proposed a number of source-routing techniques to combat this limitation, there has thus far been no way for independent ASes to ensure that such traffic does not circumvent local traffic policies, nor to accurately determine the correct party to charge for forwarding the traffic.We present Platypus, an authenticated source routing system built around the concept of network capabilities. Network capabilities allow for accountable, fine-grained path selection by cryptographically attesting to policy compliance at each hop along a source route. Capabilities can be composed to construct routes through multiple ASes and can be delegated to third parties. Platypus caters to the needs of both end users and ISPs: users gain the ability to pool their resources and select routes other than the default, while ISPs maintain control over where, when, and whose packets traverse their networks. We describe how Platypus can be used to address several well-known issues in wide-area routing at both the edge and the core, and evaluate its performance, security, and interactions with existing protocols. Our results show that incremental deployment of Platypus can achieve immediate gains.

References

  1. S. Agarwal, C.-N. Chuah, and R. H. Katz. OPCA: Robust interdomain policy routing and traffic control. In Proc. IEEE OPENARCH, June 2002.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. M. K. Aguilera, M. Ji, M. Lillibridge, J. MacCormick, E. Oertli, D. G. Andersen, M. Burrows, T. Mann, and C. A. Thekkath. Block-level security for network-attached disks. In Proc. USENIX FAST, Apr. 2003.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. D. G. Andersen. Mayday: Distributed filtering for internet services. In Proc. USITS, Mar. 2003.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. D. G. Andersen, H. Balakrishnan, M. F. Kaashoek, and R. T. Morris. Resilient overlay networks. In Proc. ACM SOSP, Oct. 2001.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. T. Anderson, T. Roscoe, and D. Wetherall. Preventing Internet denial-of-service with capabilities. In Proc. HotNets, Nov. 2003.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  6. R. Atkinson. Security architecture for the Internet protocol. RFC 1825, IETF, Aug. 1995.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. J. Black, S. Halevi, H. Krawczyk, T. Krovetz, and P. Rogaway. UMAC: Fast and secure message authentication. Advances in Cryptology -- CRYPTO '99. LNCS, 1666, 1999.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. J. Black and P. Rogaway. A block-cipher mode of operation for parallelizable message authentication. Advances in Cryptology -- EUROCRYPT '02. LNCS, 2332, 2002.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. CAIDA Skitter Project. http://www.caida.org/tools/measurement/skitter/.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. I. Castiñeyra, N. Chiappa, and M. Steenstrup. The Nimrod routing architecture. RFC 1992, IETF, Aug. 1996.]]Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  11. D. D. Clark. Policy routing in Internet protocols. RFC 1102, IETF, May 1989.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. D. D. Clark, J. Wroclawski, K. R. Sollins, and R. Braden. Tussle in cyberspace: Defining tomorrow's Internet. In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, Aug. 2002.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  13. N. G. Duffield and M. Grossglauser. Trajectory sampling for direct traffic observation. In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, Aug. 2000.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  14. D. Estrin, T. Li, Y. Rekhter, K. Varadhan, and D. Zappala. Source demand routing: Packet format and forwarding specification. RFC 1940, IETF, May 1996.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. D. Estrin, J. C. Mogul, and G. Tsudik. Visa protocols for controlling interorganizational datagram flow. IEEE J. SAC, 7(4), May 1989.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. D. Estrin and G. Tsudik. Security issues in policy routing. In Proc. IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, May 1989.]]Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  17. G. Huston. Commentary on inter-domain routing in the Internet. RFC 3221, IETF, Dec. 2001.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. H. Krawczyk, M. Bellare, and R. Canetti. HMAC: Keyed-hashing for message authentication. RFC 2104, IETF, Feb. 1997.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  19. A. Kumar, J. Xu, L. Li, J. Wang, and O. Spatschek. Space-code Bloom filter for efficient per-flow traffic measurement. In Proc. IEEE Infocom, Mar. 2004.]]Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. C. Labovitz, A. Ahuja, A. Bose, and F. Jahanian. Delayed Internet routing convergence. IEEE/ACM ToN, 9(3), June 2001.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. Leichtman Research Group. A record 2.3 million add broadband in first quarter of 2004, May 2004.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. J. B. MacQueen. On convergence of k-means and partitions with minimum average variance. Ann. Math. Stat., 36, 1965.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. R. Mahajan, N. Spring, D. Wetherall, and T. Anderson. User-level Internet path diagnosis. In Proc. ACM SOSP, Oct. 2003.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. R. Mahajan, D. Wetherall, and T. Anderson. Understanding BGP misconfiguration. In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, Aug. 2002.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. D. L. Mills. A brief history of NTP time: Memoirs of an Internet timekeeper. SIGCOMM CCR, 33(2), 2003.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. A. Nakao, L. L. Peterson, and A. Bavier. A routing underlay for overlay networks. In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, Aug. 2003.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  27. W. B. Norton. Internet service providers and peering. In Proc. NANOG, June 2000.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. L. Qiu, Y. R. Yang, Y. Zhang, and S. Shenker. On selfish routing in Internet-like environments. In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, Aug. 2003.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. E. C. Rosen, A. Viswanathan, and R. Callon. Multiprotocol label switching architecture. RFC 3031, IETF, Jan. 2001.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. B. Sanzone, D. Katz, D. Asher, D. Carlson, G. Bouchard, M. Bertone, M. Hussain, R. Kessler, and T. Hummel. NITROX II: A family of in-line security processors. In Proc. IEEE Hot Chips, Aug. 2003.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  31. S. Savage, A. Collins, E. Hoffman, J. Snell, and T. Anderson. The end-to-end effects of Internet path selection. In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, Sept. 1999.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  32. A. C. Snoeren, C. Partridge, L. A. Sanchez, C. E. Jones, F. Tchakountio, B. Schwartz, S. T. Kent, and W. T. Strayer. Single-packet IP traceback. IEEE/ACM ToN, 10(6), Dec. 2002.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  33. A. C. Snoeren and B. Raghavan. Decoupling policy from mechanism in Internet routing. In Proc. HotNets, Nov. 2003.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. N. Spring, R. Mahajan, and T. Anderson. Quantifying the causes of path inflation. In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, Aug. 2003.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. N. Spring, R. Mahajan, and D. Wetherall. Measuring ISP topologies with Rocketfuel. In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, Aug. 2002.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. I. Stoica, D. Adkins, S. Zhuang, S. Shenker, and S. Surana. Internet indirection infrastructure. In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM, Aug. 2002.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  37. I. Stoica and H. Zhang. LIRA: An approach for service differentiation in the Internet. In Proc. NOSSDAV, June 1998.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. H. Tahilramani Kaur, S. Kalyanaraman, A. Weiss, S. Kanwar, and A. Gandhi. BANANAS: An evolutionary framework for explicit and multipath routing in the Internet. In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM FDNA, Aug. 2003.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. R. Wattenhofer and P. Widmayer. An inherent bottleneck in distributed counting. In Proc. ACM PODC, Aug. 1997.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. X. Yang. NIRA: A new Internet routing architecture. In Proc. ACM SIGCOMM FDNA, Aug. 2003.]] Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  41. D. Zhu, M. Gritter, and D. R. Cheriton. Feedback based routing. In Proc. HotNets, Oct. 2002.]]Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. A system for authenticated policy-compliant routing

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in

      Full Access

      • Published in

        cover image ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review
        ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review  Volume 34, Issue 4
        October 2004
        385 pages
        ISSN:0146-4833
        DOI:10.1145/1030194
        Issue’s Table of Contents
        • cover image ACM Conferences
          SIGCOMM '04: Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications
          August 2004
          402 pages
          ISBN:1581138628
          DOI:10.1145/1015467

        Copyright © 2004 ACM

        Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 30 August 2004

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • article

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader