MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2614519474 · doi:10.1109/tnsm.2017.2704427

An Efficient Survivable Design With Bandwidth Guarantees for Multi-Tenant Cloud Networks

2017· article· en· W2614519474 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicCloud Computing and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsComputer scienceBackupCloud computingProvisioningComputer networkBandwidth (computing)Distributed computingBandwidth allocationRedundancy (engineering)Operating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In cloud data centers (DCs), where hosted applications share the underlying network resources, network bandwidth guarantees have shown to improve predictability of application performance and cost. However, recent empirical studies have also shown that often DC devices and links are not all that reliable and that failures may cause service outages, rendering significant revenue loss for the affected tenants, as well as the cloud operator. Accordingly, cloud operators are pressed to offer both reliable and predictable performance for the hosted applications. While much work has been done on solving both problems separately, this paper seeks to develop a joint framework by which cloud operators can offer both performance and availability guarantees for the hosted tenants. In particular, this paper considers a simple model to abstract the bandwidth guarantees requirement for the tenant and presents a protection plan design which consists of backup virtual machines (VMs) placement and bandwidth provisioning to optimize the internal DC traffic. We show through solid motivational examples that finding the optimal protection plan design is highly perplexing, and encompasses several constituent challenges. Owing to its complexity, we decompose it into two subproblems, and solve them separately. First, we invoke a placement subproblem of the minimum number of backup VMs and then we explore the most efficient correspondence between backup and primary VMs (i.e., protection plan) which minimizes the bandwidth redundancy. Further, we study the design of various facets of such a plan by exploiting bandwidth sharing opportunities in multi-tenant cloud networks.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.867
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it