ON THE STABILITY OF SKYPE SUPER NODES Anat Bremler-Barr Ran Goldschmidt Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya Haifa University

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Understanding KaZaA Jian Liang Rakesh Kumar Keith Ross Polytechnic University Brooklyn, N.Y.
Advertisements

Chapter 2 Application Layer Computer Networking: A Top Down Approach, 5 th edition. Jim Kurose, Keith Ross Addison-Wesley, April A note on the use.
Skype & Network Management Taken from class reference : An Analysis of the Skype Peer-to-Peer Internet Telephony Protocol Salman A. Baset and Henning Schulzrinne.
Voice over IP Skype.
Review of a research paper on Skype
An Analysis of the Skype Peer-to-Peer Internet Telephony Protocol Salman Baset and Henning Schuzrinne INFOCOMM 2006 Presenter - Bob Kinicki Presenter -
1 Version 3 Module 8 Ethernet Switching. 2 Version 3 Ethernet Switching Ethernet is a shared media –One node can transmit data at a time More nodes increases.
Road Map Application basics Web FTP DNS P2P DHT.
1 Internet Networking Spring 2004 Tutorial 13 LSNAT - Load Sharing NAT (RFC 2391)
Project Quero A fast distributed file searching network implementation Kenneth Philbrick -- Chia-Yang Hung -- Bret Sherman --
Cis e-commerce -- lecture #6: Content Distribution Networks and P2P (based on notes from Dr Peter McBurney © )
Spotlighting Decentralized P2P File Sharing Archie Kuo and Ethan Le Department of Computer Science San Jose State University.
More about Skype. Overview Any node with a public IP address having sufficient CPU, memory and network bandwidth is a candidate to become a super node.
Peer-to-Peer Intro Jani & Sami Peltotalo.
Reliability and Relay Selection in Peer- to-Peer Communication Systems Salman A. Baset and Henning Schulzrinne Internet Real-time Laboratory Department.
MCTS Guide to Microsoft Windows Server 2008 Network Infrastructure Configuration Chapter 8 Introduction to Printers in a Windows Server 2008 Network.
Skype & its protocol Aaron Loar CPE 401. Introduction Skype’s Background Topology 3 Node Types Questions.
CONTROLLING P2P APPLICATIONS VIA ADDRESS HARVESTING: THE SKYPE STORY Anat Bremler-Barr Omer Dekel Ran Goldschmidt Hanoch Levy Interdisciplinary Center.
MCTS Guide to Microsoft Windows Server 2008 Network Infrastructure Configuration Chapter 11 Managing and Monitoring a Windows Server 2008 Network.
KaZaA: Behind the Scenes Shreeram Sahasrabudhe Lehigh University
P2P File Sharing Systems
CN2668 Routers and Switches Kemtis Kunanuraksapong MSIS with Distinction MCTS, MCDST, MCP, A+
1 Napster & Gnutella An Overview. 2 About Napster Distributed application allowing users to search and exchange MP3 files. Written by Shawn Fanning in.
Guide to TCP/IP, Second Edition1 Guide To TCP/IP, Second Edition Chapter 8 The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol (DHCP)
An Analysis of the Skype Peer-to-Peer Internet Telephony Protocol Ai-Chun Pang Graduate Institute of Networking and Multimedia Dept. of Comp. Sci. and.
1 Reading Report 4 Yin Chen 26 Feb 2004 Reference: Peer-to-Peer Architecture Case Study: Gnutella Network, Matei Ruoeanu, In Int. Conf. on Peer-to-Peer.
 Introduction  VoIP  P2P Systems  Skype  SIP  Skype - SIP Similarities and Differences  Conclusion.
1 Telematica di Base Applicazioni P2P. 2 The Peer-to-Peer System Architecture  peer-to-peer is a network architecture where computer resources and services.
Chapter 17 Domain Name System
Microsoft Active Directory(AD) A presentation by Robert, Jasmine, Val and Scott IMT546 December 11, 2004.
Introduction of P2P systems
Skype P2P Kedar Kulkarni 04/02/09.
Chapter 2: Application layer
2: Application Layer1 Chapter 2: Application layer r 2.1 Principles of network applications r 2.2 Web and HTTP r 2.3 FTP r 2.4 Electronic Mail  SMTP,
Resilient Peer-to-Peer Streaming Presented by: Yun Teng.
1 CS 425 Distributed Systems Fall 2011 Slides by Indranil Gupta Measurement Studies All Slides © IG Acknowledgments: Jay Patel.
An Experimental Study of the Skype Peer-to-Peer VoIP System Saikat Guha, Cornell University Neil DasWani, Google Ravi Jain, Google IPTPS ’ 06 Presenter:
1 Peer-to-Peer Systems r Application-layer architectures r Case study: BitTorrent r P2P Search and Distributed Hash Table (DHT)
2: Application Layer1 Chapter 2: Application layer r 2.1 Principles of network applications  app architectures  app requirements r 2.2 Web and HTTP r.
1 Kyung Hee University Chapter 18 Domain Name System.
Understanding KaZaA Jian Liang Rakesh Kumar Keith Ross Polytechnic University Brooklyn, N.Y.
An Improved Kademlia Protocol In a VoIP System Xiao Wu , Cuiyun Fu and Huiyou Chang Department of Computer Science, Zhongshan University, Guangzhou, China.
Chord: A Scalable Peer-to-peer Lookup Service for Internet Applications.
Guide to TCP/IP, Third Edition Chapter 8: The Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol.
An analysis of Skype protocol Presented by: Abdul Haleem.
2: Application Layer1 Chapter 2 Application Layer Computer Networking: A Top Down Approach 6 th edition Jim Kurose, Keith Ross Addison-Wesley March 2012.
Networking in Linux. ♦ Introduction A computer network is defined as a number of systems that are connected to each other and exchange information across.
ADVANCED COMPUTER NETWORKS Peer-Peer (P2P) Networks 1.
POSTECH DP&NM Lab. Internet Traffic Monitoring and Analysis: Methods and Applications (1) 1.Introduction.
WEEK 11 – TOPOLOGIES, TCP/IP, SHARING & SECURITY IT1001- Personal Computer Hardware System & Operations.
Peer-to-Peer Systems: An Overview Hongyu Li. Outline  Introduction  Characteristics of P2P  Algorithms  P2P Applications  Conclusion.
PEAR TO PEAR PROTOCOL. Pure P2P architecture no always-on server arbitrary end systems directly communicate peers are intermittently connected and change.
CMSC 691B Multi-Agent System A Scalable Architecture for Peer to Peer Agent by Naveen Srinivasan.
1 Netflow Collection and Aggregation in the AT&T Common Backbone Carsten Lund.
Skype.
CS Spring 2010 CS 414 – Multimedia Systems Design Lecture 24 – Introduction to Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Systems Klara Nahrstedt (presented by Long Vu)
Vehicular Communications Paradigms ORT Braude College of Engineering Software Engineering Department April 2012 Students: Evgeny Yudashkin & Tal Bahalool.
Unit 7: DHCP, APIPA and NTP. Static versus dynamic IP addressing Dynamic IP addresses can change each time you connect to the Internet, while static IP.
Accelerating Peer-to-Peer Networks for Video Streaming
Introduction.
An example of peer-to-peer application
NGS data transmission, A point view from a user
3 | Analyzing Server, Network, and Client Health
Client-Server Interaction
Data and Computer Communications by William Stallings Eighth Edition
Skype P2P communication
Part 4: Peer to Peer - P2P Applications
The Active Node Transfer System By Chris McAnally & Manu Mittal
A Scalable Peer-to-peer Lookup Service for Internet Applications
Presentation transcript:

ON THE STABILITY OF SKYPE SUPER NODES Anat Bremler-Barr Ran Goldschmidt Interdisciplinary Center Herzliya Haifa University

Background: VoIP P2P Technology Proprietary signaling and media protocol

Architecture: Based on partially centralized P2P networks Two types of peer nodes: Regular Clients and Super Nodes Super Nodes (SNs): Control level – heart of Skype Super Nodes = Skype Clients with good Bandwidth, CPU usage...

The Role of a Super Node (SN) Maintains control information: the IPs of the Skype users Each client maintains an SN list  subset of SNs SN list is constantly updated Client that wishes to use Skype (to call) picks one SN from the SN list Querying the IP of the callee SN is defined by (IP,Port) Call Bob IP= , Port=3

Main goal: Understanding the stability of SNs P2P networks have an inherent dynamic nature Clients and computers join and leave the network constantly Choosing stable SNs is an important task: Improve the performance and quality of the P2P network Our goal: measure the stability of SNs and understand how to choose stable SNs

Experiment Methodology Harvesting of SNs: Using the SN list - version 2.5 holds a list of 200 SNs UDP packet of Skype login Stage 1: Collecting 10,000 SNs in 15 minutes Stage 2: Ping each SN every 15 minutes for 3 months

Absolute Availability Low: 50% of the SNs are available less than 18% of the test time, < 16 days Absolute Availability = the percentage of time the SN is up during the test 18% -16 days

Number of Sessions of SN 40% of the SNs have one session! A session is the continuous period of time the node is up.

MSLT vs SSLT  We define two group of SNs: o Single Session in Life Time (SSLT) o Multiple Sessions in Life Time (MSLT)  We analyze the different characteristics of the two groups  We play “what if” game and show the stability of the system if we take SNs only from one group (SSLT or MSLT)

Residual life SSLT (one session) : median of residual life is 1.75 days MSLT (multi session) : median of residual life is 67.5 days Residual life time - time elapsed between the harvesting of the SN until the end of its last session

First Session Length SSLT (one session) : median of session is 1.75 MSLT (multi session) : median of session is 4.35 Surprise ! Super Nodes in SSLT have only one session and a shorter one…

The impact on the System: Churn Churn measures the number of times an SN goes down and we need to replace the SN. Assumption: system maintains a fixed number of SNs When an SN fails, the system picks another one to replace it. When an SN fails and then recovers, the SN is like a new SN. Result: SSLT: 0.35 turnovers per day MSLT: 0.22 turnovers per day

The impact on the System: Accessibility Accessibility: the probability that an SN is alive as a function of time If an SN fails and then recovers, the SN is viewed as a node that never failed. Impact: The lower accessibility value the higher the update rate of the SN list

Skype Accessibility The SNs are distributed over the world  good accessibility. The SNs in the SN list are also distributed over the world.

SSLT and MSLT Summery A huge difference between the characteristics of SSLT and MSLT SNs Choosing SNs from the MSLT group would improve the churn and accessibility of the P2P system dramatically Why SSLT and MSLT are so different?

Our Answer: Static vs. Dynamic IPs SSLT = dynamic IPs Residential users: Cable, xDSL… The address is changed from time to time (or between sessions) SN died since the IP address of the SN was replaced Good chance that this SN is alive but with a different IP address MSLT = static IPs SN can leave and return with the same IP Servers or academic networks  high availability  good infrastructure  longer session

Classifying SNs according to the address type The vast majority 84.92% of the static IP SNs belongs to the MSLT group The dynamic IPs group shows weaker correlation with only 61.45% of the SNs belongs to SSLT group We think that this is due to “Sticky Dynamic IPs” – DHCP technology Client that is disconnected from the network returns to its old IP if the break is short Classifying using DNS information

Related Work Our work: Skype Super Nodes Most previous work: on file transfer Skype: application is on all the time the computer is on File transfer: application is on only when performing file transfer File TransferSkype Session Short (hours)Long (days) Dynamic Application impactComputer impact (IP address type effect) Check: correlation between ICMP and Skype Ping

Summary & Practical Implication Practical implication: choosing SNs with static IPs  stable P2P network Note: Classifying the IP is an easy task for the P2P application. The high stability of static IPs is due to two reasons: 1. Static IPs do not change the IP address - Impact the Accessibility 2. Computers with static IPs are more stable computers - Impact the Churn