Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
article

Strategic Pricing in Next-Hop Routing with Elastic Demands

Published: 01 April 2014 Publication History

Abstract

We consider a model of next-hop routing by self-interested agents. In this model, nodes in a graph (representing ISPs, Autonomous Systems, etc.) make pricing decisions of how much to charge for forwarding traffic from each of their upstream neighbors, and routing decisions of which downstream neighbors to forward traffic to (i.e., choosing the next hop). Traffic originates at a subset of these nodes that derive a utility when the traffic is routed to its destination node; the traffic demand is elastic and the utility derived from it can be different for different source nodes. Our next-hop routing and pricing model is in sharp contrast with the more common source routing and pricing models, in which the source of traffic determines the entire route from source to destination. For our model, we begin by showing sufficient conditions for prices to result in a Nash equilibrium, and in fact give an efficient algorithm to compute a Nash equilibrium which is as good as the centralized optimum, thus proving that the price of stability is 1. When only a single source node exists, then the price of anarchy is 1 as well, as long as some minor assumptions on player behavior is made. The above results hold for arbitrary convex pricing functions, but with the assumption that the utilities derived from getting traffic to its destination are linear. When utilities can be non-linear functions, we show that Nash equilibrium may not exist, even with simple discrete pricing models.

References

[1]
Acemoglu, D., Johari, R., Ozdaglar, A.E.: Partially optimal routing. IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun. 25(6), 1148---1160 (2007)
[2]
Anshelevich, E., Shepherd, B., Wilfong, G.: Strategic network formation through peering and service agreements. Games Econ. Behav. 73(1), 17---38 (2011)
[3]
Anshelevich, E., Wilfong, G.: Network formation and routing by strategic agents using local contracts. In: Proc. 4th International Workshop on Internet and Network Economics (WINE 2008) (2008)
[4]
Archer, A., Tardos, É.: Frugal path mechanisms. ACM Trans. Algorithms 3(1), 3 (2007)
[5]
Blume, L., Easley, D., Kleinberg, J., Tardos, É.: Trading networks with price-setting agents. In: Proc. 8th ACM Conference on Electronic Commerce (2007)
[6]
Chawla, S., Niu, F.: The price of anarchy in Bertrand games. In: Proceedings of EC (2009)
[7]
Chawla, S., Roughgarden, T.: Bertrand competition in networks. In: Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on Algorithmic Game Theory (SAGT'08) (2008)
[8]
Feigenbaum, J., Papadimitriou, C.H., Sami, R., Shenker, S.: A BGP-based mechanism for lowest-cost routing. Distrib. Comput. 18(1), 61---72 (2005)
[9]
Feigenbaum, J., Schapira, M., Shenker, S.: Distributed algorithmic mechanism design. In: Nisan, N., Roughgarden, T., Tardos, É., Vazirani, V.V. (eds.) Algorithmic Game Theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2007). Chap. 14
[10]
Hall, A., Nikolova, E., Papadimitriou, C.: Incentive-compatible interdomain routing with linear utilities. Internet Math. 5(4), 395---410 (2008). Special issue for selected papers from WINE'07
[11]
Hayrapetyan, A., Tardos, É., Wexler, T.: A network pricing game for selfish traffic. Distrib. Comput. 19(4), 255---266 (2007)
[12]
Huston, G.: Interconnection, peering, and settlements. In: Proceedings of the Internet Global Summit. The Internet Society, San Jose, June 1999
[13]
Johari, R., Mannor, S., Tsitsiklis, J.N.: A contract-based model for directed network formation. Games Econ. Behav. 56(2), 201---224 (2005)
[14]
Levin, H., Schapira, M., Zohar, A.: Interdomain routing and games. SIAM J. Comput. 40(6), 1892---1912 (2011). Special issue on selected papers from STOC
[15]
Ozdaglar, A., Srikant, R.: Incentives and pricing in communication networks. In: Nisan, N., Roughgarden, T., Tardos, É., Vazirani, V.V. (eds.) Algorithmic Game Theory. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2007). Chap. 22
[16]
Papadimitriou, C., Valiant, G.: A new look at selfish routing. In: Innovations in Computer Science (2010)
[17]
Rekhter, Y., Li, T.: A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4), RFC 4271 (January 2006)
[18]
Roughgarden, T., Tardos, É.: How bad is selfish routing? J. ACM 49(2), 236---259 (2002)
[19]
Schapira, M., Zhu, Y., Rexford, J.: Putting BGP on the right path: a case for next-hop routing. In: Proceedings of HotNets-IX, Monterey, CA, October 2010
[20]
Srinivasan, V., Nuggehalli, P., Chiasserini, C.F., Rao, R.R.: An analytical approach to the study of cooperation in wireless ad hoc networks. IEEE Trans. Wirel. Commun. 4(2), 722---733 (2005)
[21]
Xi, Y., Yeh, E.M.: Pricing, competition, and routing in relay networks. In: Proceedings of the 47th Annual Allerton Conference on Communication, Control, and Computing (Allerton'09) (2009)
[22]
Yuksel, M., Gupta, A., Kar, K., Kalyanaraman, S.: Contract-switching for managing inter-domain dynamics. In: Ramamurthy, B., Rouskas, G.N., Sivalingam, K.M. (eds.) Next-Generation Internet Architectures and Protocols, pp. 136---153. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2010)

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image Theory of Computing Systems
Theory of Computing Systems  Volume 54, Issue 3
April 2014
155 pages

Publisher

Springer-Verlag

Berlin, Heidelberg

Publication History

Published: 01 April 2014

Author Tags

  1. Elastic demand
  2. Nash equilibrium
  3. Network pricing
  4. Price of stability
  5. Selfish routing

Qualifiers

  • Article

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 0
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)0
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 27 Jan 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

View options

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media