Accessing Multiple Mirror Sites in Parallel: Using Tornado Codes to Speed Up Downloads John Byers, Boston University Michael Luby, Digital Fountain, Inc.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
A Digital Fountain Approach to Reliable Distribution of Bulk Data
Advertisements

Digital Fountains: Applications and Related Issues Michael Mitzenmacher.
An Easy-to-Decode Network Coding Scheme for Wireless Broadcasting
Computer Networking A Top-Down Approach Chapter 4.7.
Multicast in Wireless Mesh Network Xuan (William) Zhang Xun Shi.
Incentives Build Robustness in BitTorrent Bram Cohen.
Digital Fountain Codes V. S
José Vieira Information Theory 2010 Information Theory MAP-Tele José Vieira IEETA Departamento de Electrónica, Telecomunicações e Informática Universidade.
Jump to first page A. Patwardhan, CSE Digital Fountains Main Ideas : n Distribution of bulk data n Reliable multicast, broadcast n Ideal digital.
D.J.C MacKay IEE Proceedings Communications, Vol. 152, No. 6, December 2005.
Performance Analysis of a Parallel Downloading Scheme from Mirror Sites Throughout the Internet Allen Miu, Eugene Shih Class Project December 3,
David Ripplinger, Aradhana Narula-Tam, Katherine Szeto AIAA 2013 August 21, 2013 Scheduling vs Random Access in Frequency Hopped Airborne.
Scalable On-demand Media Streaming with Packet Loss Recovery Anirban Mahanti Department of Computer Science University of Calgary Calgary, AB T2N 1N4 Canada.
Multimedia Streaming Protocols1 Multimedia Streaming: Jun Lu Xinran (Ryan) Wu CSE228 Multimedia Systems Challenges and Protocols.
Resilient Peer-to-Peer Streaming Paper by: Venkata N. Padmanabhan Helen J. Wang Philip A. Chou Discussion Leader: Manfred Georg Presented by: Christoph.
CS 268: Project Ideas Kevin Lai Feb 6, Announcements  Summary submission method -cp laik.jac88.html ~cs268/reviews -chmod.
Computer Science 1 ShapeShifter: Scalable, Adaptive End-System Multicast John Byers, Jeffrey Considine, Nicholas Eskelinen, Stanislav Rost, Dmitriy Zavin.
Efficient and Flexible Parallel Retrieval using Priority Encoded Transmission(2004) CMPT 886 Represented By: Lilong Shi.
Computer Science ROMA: Reliable Overlay Multicast with Loosely Coupled TCP Connections Gu-In Kwon and John Byers Computer Science Dept. Boston University.
Network Coding for Large Scale Content Distribution Christos Gkantsidis Georgia Institute of Technology Pablo Rodriguez Microsoft Research IEEE INFOCOM.
Informed Content Delivery Across Adaptive Overlay Networks J. Byers, J. Considine, M. Mitzenmacher and S. Rost Presented by Ananth Rajagopala-Rao.
Threshold Phenomena and Fountain Codes
Erasure Correcting Codes
Fountain Codes Amin Shokrollahi EPFL and Digital Fountain, Inc.
Forward Error Correction Steven Marx CSC45712/04/2001.
Cyclone Server Architecture Streamlining Delivery of Popular Content Stanislav Rost John Byers Azer Bestavros.
Fine-Grained Layered Multicast John Byers Dept. of Computer Science, Boston University Digital Fountain, Inc.
SomeCast A Paradigm for Real-Time Adaptive Reliable Multicast Presented by: Ibrahim Matta IEEE Real-Time Technology and Applications Symposium (RTAS ‘2000),
Reliable Transport Layers in Wireless Networks Mark Perillo Electrical and Computer Engineering.
1 Scalable Video Coding with Digital Fountain Kai-Chao Yang.
Digital Fountain with Tornado Codes and LT Codes K. C. Yang.
Informed Content Delivery Across Adaptive Overlay Networks John Byers Dept. of Computer Science, Boston University Joint work with.
Multiple Sender Distributed Video Streaming Nguyen, Zakhor IEEE Transactions on Multimedia April 2004.
Broadcast and multicast routing A superb presentation from Joakim Lundmark and Martin Neuman.
SEPT, 2005CSI Part 2.2 Protocols and Protocol Layering Robert Probert, SITE, University of Ottawa.
1 CMSCD1011 Introduction to Computer Audio Lecture 10: Streaming audio for Internet transmission Dr David England School of Computing and Mathematical.
A Virtual Circuit Multicast Transport Protocol (VCMTP) for Scientific Data Distribution Jie Li and Malathi Veeraraghavan University of Virginia Steve Emmerson.
Scalable On-Demand Media Streaming with Packet Loss Recovery A. Mahanti, D. L. Eager, (USask) M. K. Vernon, D S-Stukel (Wisc) Presented by Cheng Huang.
Streaming Video over the Internet Dapeng Wu Electrical & Computer Engineering University of Florida.
1 Codes, Bloom Filters, and Overlay Networks Michael Mitzenmacher.
Bullet: High Bandwidth Data Dissemination Using an Overlay Mesh.
Computer Science Informed Content Delivery Across Adaptive Overlay Networks Overlay networks have emerged as a powerful and highly flexible method for.
1 Chapter 16 Protocols and Protocol Layering. 2 Protocol  Agreement about communication  Specifies  Format of messages (syntax)  Meaning of messages.
Multicast Routing Algorithms n Multicast routing n Flooding and Spanning Tree n Forward Shortest Path algorithm n Reversed Path Forwarding (RPF) algorithms.
Computer Networks Performance Metrics. Performance Metrics Outline Generic Performance Metrics Network performance Measures Components of Hop and End-to-End.
On the use of Reliable Multicast for Content Distribution Vassilis Chatzigiannakis
Error control in video Streaming. Introduction Development of different types of n/ws such as internet, wireless and mobile networks has created new applications.
Switching breaks up large collision domains into smaller ones Collision domain is a network segment with two or more devices sharing the same Introduction.
Threshold Phenomena and Fountain Codes Amin Shokrollahi EPFL Joint work with M. Luby, R. Karp, O. Etesami.
CprE 545 project proposal Long.  Introduction  Random linear code  LT-code  Application  Future work.
Multicast Routing, Error Control, and Congestion Control.
Computer Networks Lecture 3: Data Link - part II Based on slides from D. Choffnes Northeastern U. and P. Gill from StonyBrook University Revised Autumn.
Forward Error Correction vs. Active Retransmit Requests in Wireless Networks Robbert Haarman.
Page 1 The department of Information & Communications Engineering Dong-uk, kim A Survey of Packet Loss Recovery Techniques for Streaming.
Computer Science Division
5: DataLink Layer 5a-1 Multiple Access protocol. 5: DataLink Layer 5a-2 Multiple Access Links and Protocols Three types of “links”: r point-to-point (single.
EE689 Lecture 13 Review of Last Lecture Reliable Multicast.
CS/EE 145A Reliable Transmission over Unreliable Channel II Netlab.caltech.edu/course.
1 Protocols and Protocol Layering. 2 Protocol Agreement about communication Specifies –Format of messages –Meaning of messages –Rules for exchange –Procedures.
Networked Multimedia Basics. Network Characteristics.
Coding for Multipath TCP: Opportunities and Challenges Øyvind Ytrehus University of Bergen and Simula Res. Lab. NNUW-2, August 29, 2014.
Solutions to Support Mobility in SDN-Based Dense Wireless Networks
Accelerating Peer-to-Peer Networks for Video Streaming
Switching Techniques.
Jiyong Park Seoul National University, Korea
Link Layer and LANs Not everyone is meant to make a difference. But for me, the choice to lead an ordinary life is no longer an option 5: DataLink Layer.
Protocols and Protocol Layering
TCP Congestion Control
Computer Networks Protocols
Protocols and Protocol Layering
Presentation transcript:

Accessing Multiple Mirror Sites in Parallel: Using Tornado Codes to Speed Up Downloads John Byers, Boston University Michael Luby, Digital Fountain, Inc. Michael Mitzenmacher, Harvard INFOCOM 99

The Problem Multicast: to save bandwidth. Sender Receivers Senders Receiver Parallel download: to improve speed.

Many-to-many Distribution Heterogeneous environment of senders and receivers. Senders broadcast. Receivers gather data as fast as possible from as many sources as possible. Senders Receivers

Results A simple, robust, scalable solution for parallel downloads and many-to-many distribution using Forward Error Correction. Examination of tradeoffs –Speed vs. Goodput

Applications Internet –Connect to many mirror sites simultaneously. Multiple access media –ISDN and modem simultaneously. Mobile clients –Multiple access points. –Listen to multiple frequencies. Satellite networks –Ground user receives from many satellites.

Assumptions Possible to create bottleneck-disjoint paths. –Otherwise wasted bandwidth, more congestion. –Receiver should not be the bottleneck. –For people with big pipes. Senders Receiver Senders Receiver dropped Bottleneck Disjoint Shared Bottleneck

Solutions without Coding A protocol without codes: –Initially receiver tells each of s senders to send disjoint 1/s parts of the file. –If one sender finishes early, re-negotiate packets to be sent. –Continue until all packets arrive. Problems –Significant feedback. –Unsuitable for many-to-many. –Complexity. –No protection against losses. –Wait for last packet.

Forward Error Correction (FEC) Message of n packets encoded as cn packets. –A receiver decodes once enough packets arrive. FEC codes improve multicast scalability –Encoding packets can correct different losses for different receivers. –Reduces feedback, to even feedback-free solutions.

Tornado Codes Tornado Codes are FEC codes that are –Very fast (linear time). –Better for large files. –Information-theoretically slightly suboptimal. Requires 1.055n packets to decode n packet message.

Ideal Solution: Digital Fountain Reconstruct file from any n packets, from any source. Feedback free: no need for receivers to acknowledge specific packets. Fountain metaphor: drink when the cup is full. Approximate digital fountain solution using Tornado codes. –Reception inefficiency due to overhead of Tornado codes, duplicate packets.

Feedback Free Solution Senders encode message the same way. Senders cycle through permutation of encoding When receiver obtain any 211 distinct packets, it can decode to obtain the message Original Message Encoded Message

Performance Metrics Speedup: Stretch factor (c): message of n packets encoded as cn packets. Reception inefficiency (z): zn packets arrive before decoding. –Code overhead –Duplicates Download time now Download time using single fastest sender

Tradeoffs Increasing stretch c: –Lessens duplicates: senders have more packets to send, so random collisions less likely –Increases encoding/decoding time, memory requirements, and complexity. (Grow linearly in c.)

Feedback Free Solution Pros –Simple –Loss protection –Good download speedups –No feedback, coordination –Solves many-to-many Cons –Extra bandwidth for Tornado codes (5.5%) –Extra bandwidth from packet duplicates depends on c, number of senders, variation in rates additional %

Rare Feedback Senders use same permutation of encoding. Receivers tell each of s senders to send 1/s of the encoding. –If c > s, each sender has 1 file worth of data. In rare cases, re-negotiate, or have senders send the rest in random order

Rare Feedback Pros –Simple –Loss protection –Rare feedback, minimal coordination –Extra bandwidth for Tornado codes only Cons –Does not solve multi-multi –Extra bandwidth for Tornado Codes

Conclusions Fast parallel download and many-to-many distributions are practical. –Trade goodput for speed. FEC improves protocols. –Simpler. –Less feedback. –Loss protection. Deployment issues (fairness, bottleneck disjoint paths) still open.