Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
10.1145/3565009.3569524acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesconextConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

The case for native multi-node in-network machine learning

Published: 06 December 2022 Publication History

Abstract

It is now possible to run per-packet Machine Learning (ML) inference tasks in the data plane at line-rate with dedicated hardware in programmable network switches. We refer to this approach as per-packet ML. Existing work in this area focuses on a single node setup, where the incoming packets are processed by the switch pipeline to extract features at different levels of granularity: packet-level, flow-level, cross-flow level, while also considering device-level features. The extracted features are then processed by an ML inference fabric inside the same switch.
In this position paper, we propose to extend and enhance this model from a single node to a collection of nodes (including switches and servers). In fact, there are several scenarios where it is impossible for a single node to perform both feature processing (e.g., due to lack of or limited access to data) and the ML inference operations. In a multi-node setup, a node can extract ML features and encode them in packets as metadata, which are then processed by another node (e.g., switch) to execute native inference tasks. We make a case for a standard model of extracting, encoding, and forwarding features between nodes to carryout distributed, native ML inference inside networks; discuss the applicability and versatility of the proposed model; and illustrate the various open research issues and design implications.

References

[1]
Anon. 2022. Extensible In-band Processing (EIP) Home Page. https://eip-home.github.io/eip/. Accessed: 2022-09-29.
[2]
Onur Barut, Matthew Grohotolski, Connor DiLeo, Yan Luo, Peilong Li, and Tong Zhang. 2020. Machine Learning Based Malware Detection on Encrypted Traffic: A Comprehensive Performance Study. In 7th International Conference on Networking, Systems and Security. 45--55.
[3]
Onur Barut, Yan Luo, Tong Zhang, Weigang Li, and Peilong Li. 2020. NetML: A Challenge for Network Traffic Analytics. CoRR (2020). arXiv:2004.13006 https://arxiv.org/abs/2004.13006
[4]
Coralie Busse-Grawitz, Roland Meier, Alexander Dietmüller, Tobias Bühler, and Laurent Vanbever. 2019. pforest: In-network inference with random forests. arXiv preprint arXiv:1909.05680 (2019).
[5]
D. Barradas et al. 2021. FlowLens: Enabling Efficient Flow Classification for ML-based Network Security Applications. In Network and Distributed System Security (NDSS) Symposium.
[6]
L Dhanabal and SP Shantharajah. 2015. A study on NSL-KDD dataset for intrusion detection system based on classification algorithms. International journal of advanced research in computer and communication engineering 4, 6 (2015), 446--452.
[7]
Cristian Estan, Ken Keys, David Moore, and George Varghese. 2004. Building a better NetFlow. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 34, 4 (2004), 245--256.
[8]
Tang Tuan A et al. 2016. Deep learning approach for network intrusion detection in software defined networking. In 2016 international conference on wireless networks and mobile communications. IEEE.
[9]
Yilong Geng, Shiyu Liu, Zi Yin, Ashish Naik, Balaji Prabhakar, Mendel Rosenblum, and Amin Vahdat. 2019. SIMON: A Simple and Scalable Method for Sensing, Inference and Measurement in Data Center Networks. In 16th USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI 19). 549--564.
[10]
Rick Hofstede, Pavel Čeleda, Brian Trammell, Idilio Drago, Ramin Sadre, Anna Sperotto, and Aiko Pras. 2014. Flow monitoring explained: From packet capture to data analysis with netflow and ipfix. IEEE Communications Surveys & Tutorials 16, 4 (2014), 2037--2064.
[11]
Jordan Holland, Paul Schmitt, Nick Feamster, and Prateek Mittal. 2021. New Directions in Automated Traffic Analysis. In Proceedings of the 2021 ACM SIGSAC Conference on Computer and Communications Security (Virtual Event, Republic of Korea) (CCS '21). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 3366--3383.
[12]
IANA. [n.d.]. IP Flow Information Export (IPFIX) Entities. https://www.iana.org/assignments/ipfix/ipfix.xhtml
[13]
Yuliang Li, Rui Miao, Changhoon Kim, and Minlan Yu. 2016. {FlowRadar}: A Better {NetFlow} for Data Centers. In 13th USENIX symposium on networked systems design and implementation (NSDI 16).
[14]
N McKeown. 2015. PISA: Protocol Independent Switch Architecture. In P4 Workshop.
[15]
S. Salsano et al. 2022. Extensible In-band Processing (EIP) Architecture and Framework. draft-eip-arch. https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-eip-arch Work in Progress.
[16]
S. Salsano et al. 2022. Supporting Future Internet Services with Extensible In-Band Processing (EIP). In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Future of Internet Routing & Addressing (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (FIRA '22). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 92--98.
[17]
Tushar Swamy, Alexander Rucker, Muhammad Shahbaz, Ishan Gaur, and Kunle Olukotun. 2022. Taurus: a data plane architecture for per-packet ML. In Proceedings of the 27th ACM International Conference on Architectural Support for Programming Languages and Operating Systems. 1099--1114.
[18]
Tushar Swamy, Annus Zulfiqar, Luigi Nardi, Muhammad Shahbaz, and Kunle Olukotun. 2022. Homunculus: Auto-Generating Efficient Data-Plane ML Pipelines for Datacenter Networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.05592 (2022).
[19]
Marcos AM Vieira, Matheus S Castanho, Racyus DG Pacífico, Elerson RS Santos, Eduardo PM Câmara Júnior, and Luiz FM Vieira. 2020. Fast packet processing with ebpf and xdp: Concepts, code, challenges, and applications. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 53, 1 (2020), 1--36.
[20]
Zhaoqi Xiong and Noa Zilberman. 2019. Do Switches Dream of Machine Learning? Toward In-Network Classification. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (Princeton, NJ, USA) (HotNets '19). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 25--33.
[21]
Xiwen Yu, Hongli Xu, Da Yao, Haibo Wang, and Liusheng Huang. 2018. Count-Max: A lightweight and cooperative sketch measurement for software-defined networks. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking 26, 6 (2018), 2774--2786.

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
NativeNi '22: Proceedings of the 1st International Workshop on Native Network Intelligence
December 2022
38 pages
ISBN:9781450398879
DOI:10.1145/3565009
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]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 06 December 2022

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

CoNEXT '22
Sponsor:

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • 0
    Total Citations
  • 132
    Total Downloads
  • Downloads (Last 12 months)47
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)4
Reflects downloads up to 02 Sep 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

View Options

Get Access

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media