Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Shrinivasa Kini

dblp:22/7285 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
3ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2010
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Computer networks · 3 · 2 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Computer networks
2 papers
Routing and switching · 60% Internet architecture and protocols · 21% Optical networks · 18%

Topics — the 4 heaviest of 4, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Routing and switching › fast reroute
IP fast reroute
0.222010
Fast Recovery From Dual-Link or Single-Node Failures in IP Networks Using Tunneling · IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw. 2010
Fast Recovery from Dual Link Failures in IP Networks · INFOCOM 2009
Routing and switching › link failure recovery
backup path
0.112010
Fast Recovery From Dual-Link or Single-Node Failures in IP Networks Using Tunneling · IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw. 2010
Internet architecture and protocols
tunneling
0.112010
Fast Recovery From Dual-Link or Single-Node Failures in IP Networks Using Tunneling · IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw. 2010
Optical networks › network survivability
path protection
0.112009
Fast Recovery from Dual Link Failures in IP Networks · INFOCOM 2009

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

simulation · 0.1tunneling · 0.1graph theory · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2010 Fast Recovery From Dual-Link or Single-Node Failures in IP Networks Using Tunneling
abstract
This paper develops novel mechanisms for recovering from failures in IP networks with proactive backup path calculations and Internet Protocol (IP) tunneling. The primary scheme provides resilience for up to two link failures along a path. The highlight of the developed routing approach is that a node reroutes a packet around the failed link without the knowledge of the second link failure. The proposed technique requires three protection addresses for every node, in addition to the normal address. Associated with every protection address of a node is a protection graph. Each link connected to the node is removed in at least one of the protection graphs, and every protection graph is guaranteed to be two-edge-connected. The network recovers from the first failure by tunneling the packet to the next-hop node using one of the protection addresses of the next-hop node; the packet is routed over the protection graph corresponding to that protection address. We prove that it is sufficient to provide up to three protection addresses per node to tolerate any arbitrary two link failures in a three-edge-connected graph. An extension to the basic scheme provides recovery from single-node failures in the network. It involves identification of the failed node in the packet path and then routing the packet to the destination along an alternate path not containing the failed node. The effectiveness of the proposed techniques were evaluated by simulating the developed algorithms over several network topologies.
Shrinivasa Kini, Srinivasan Ramasubramanian, Amund Kvalbein, Audun Fosselie Hansen
IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw.1
2009 Fast Recovery from Dual Link Failures in IP Networks
abstract
This paper develops a novel mechanism for recovering from dual link failures in IP networks. The highlight of the developed routing approach is that a node re-routes a packet around the failed link without the knowledge of the second link failure. The proposed technique requires three protection addresses for every node, in addition to the normal address. Associated with every protection address of a node is a protection graph. Each link connected to the node is removed in at least one of protection graphs and every protection graph is guaranteed to be two-edge connected. The network recovers from the first failure by tunneling the packet to the next-hop node using one of the protection addresses of the next-hop node; and the packet is routed over the protection graph corresponding to that protection address. We prove that it is sufficient to provide up to three protection addresses per node to tolerate any arbitrary two link failures in a three-edge connected graph. We evaluate the effectiveness of the proposed technique over several network topologies.
Shrinivasa Kini, Srinivasan Ramasubramanian, Amund Kvalbein, Audun Fosselie Hansen
INFOCOM1
2009 Bounds on coverage time and node density for multi-modality sensing
Sandeep Kour Ahuja, Shrinivasa Kini, Srinivasan Ramasubramanian
Ad Hoc Networks2