Implicit group messaging in peer-to-peer networks Daniel Cutting, 28th April 2006 Advanced Networks Research Group.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Alex Cheung and Hans-Arno Jacobsen August, 14 th 2009 MIDDLEWARE SYSTEMS RESEARCH GROUP.
Advertisements

Ion Stoica, Robert Morris, David Karger, M. Frans Kaashoek, Hari Balakrishnan MIT and Berkeley presented by Daniel Figueiredo Chord: A Scalable Peer-to-peer.
Replication Strategies in Unstructured Peer-to-Peer Networks Edith Cohen Scott Shenker This is a modified version of the original presentation by the authors.
Scalable Content-Addressable Network Lintao Liu
Bio Michel Hanna M.S. in E.E., Cairo University, Egypt B.S. in E.E., Cairo University at Fayoum, Egypt Currently is a Ph.D. Student in Computer Engineering.
Impact Analysis of Cheating in Application Level Multicast s 1090176 Masayuki Higuchi.
File Processing - Indirect Address Translation MVNC1 Hashing Indirect Address Translation Chapter 11.
Precept 6 Hashing & Partitioning 1 Peng Sun. Server Load Balancing Balance load across servers Normal techniques: Round-robin? 2.
VDR: Proactive element Conclusions VDR reaches 3.5% more nodes than VDR-R and 9% more nodes than our modified random walk routing strategy (RWR) VDR shows.
Implicit group messaging in peer-to-peer networks Daniel Cutting, 30th November 2005.
SCRIBE A large-scale and decentralized application-level multicast infrastructure.
MANETs Routing Dr. Raad S. Al-Qassas Department of Computer Science PSUT
Small-world Overlay P2P Network
Scribe: A Large-Scale and Decentralized Application-Level Multicast Infrastructure Miguel Castro, Peter Druschel, Anne-Marie Kermarrec, and Antony L. T.
ZIGZAG A Peer-to-Peer Architecture for Media Streaming By Duc A. Tran, Kien A. Hua and Tai T. Do Appear on “Journal On Selected Areas in Communications,
Pastry: Scalable, decentralized object location and routing for large-scale peer-to-peer systems Antony Rowstron and Peter Druschel Proc. of the 18th IFIP/ACM.
M ERCURY : A Scalable Publish-Subscribe System for Internet Games Ashwin R. Bharambe, Sanjay Rao & Srinivasan Seshan Carnegie Mellon University.
Internet Indirection Infrastructure Ion Stoica UC Berkeley.
Carnegie Mellon University Complex queries in distributed publish- subscribe systems Ashwin R. Bharambe, Justin Weisz and Srinivasan Seshan.
Rendezvous Points-Based Scalable Content Discovery with Load Balancing Jun Gao Peter Steenkiste Computer Science Department Carnegie Mellon University.
Efficient Content Location Using Interest-based Locality in Peer-to-Peer Systems Presented by: Lin Wing Kai.
CSCI 4550/8556 Computer Networks Comer, Chapter 19: Binding Protocol Addresses (ARP)
Exploiting Content Localities for Efficient Search in P2P Systems Lei Guo 1 Song Jiang 2 Li Xiao 3 and Xiaodong Zhang 1 1 College of William and Mary,
Study of the Relationship between Peer-to-Peer Systems and IP Multicasting T. Oh-ishi, K. Sakai, K. Kikuma, and A. Kurokawa NTT Network Service Systems.
Or, Providing Scalable, Decentralized Location and Routing Network Services Tapestry: Fault-tolerant Wide-area Application Infrastructure Motivation and.
An Evaluation of Scalable Application-level Multicast Using Peer-to-peer Overlays Miguel Castro, Michael B. Jones, Anne-Marie Kermarrec, Antony Rowstron,
 Structured peer to peer overlay networks are resilient – but not secure.  Even a small fraction of malicious nodes may result in failure of correct.
INTRODUCTION TO PEER TO PEER NETWORKS Z.M. Joseph CSE 6392 – DB Exploration Spring 2006 CSE, UT Arlington.
1 A scalable Content- Addressable Network Sylvia Rathnasamy, Paul Francis, Mark Handley, Richard Karp, Scott Shenker Pirammanayagam Manickavasagam.
Roger ZimmermannCOMPSAC 2004, September 30 Spatial Data Query Support in Peer-to-Peer Systems Roger Zimmermann, Wei-Shinn Ku, and Haojun Wang Computer.
Study of the Relationship between Peer to Peer Systems and IP Multicasting From IEEE Communication Magazine January 2003 學號 :M 姓名 : 邱 秀 純.
1 Napster & Gnutella An Overview. 2 About Napster Distributed application allowing users to search and exchange MP3 files. Written by Shawn Fanning in.
1 Internet Protocol: Forwarding IP Datagrams Chapter 7.
CEN Network Fundamentals Chapter 19 Binding Protocol Addresses (ARP) To insert your company logo on this slide From the Insert Menu Select “Picture”
Privacy-Preserving P2P Data Sharing with OneSwarm -Piggy.
Communication (II) Chapter 4
© Janice Regan, CMPT 128, CMPT 371 Data Communications and Networking Multicast routing.
PIC: Practical Internet Coordinates for Distance Estimation Manuel Costa joint work with Miguel Castro, Ant Rowstron, Peter Key Microsoft Research Cambridge.
ON DESIGING END-USER MULTICAST FOR MULTIPLE VIDEO SOURCES Y.Nakamura, H.Yamaguchi, A.Hiromori, K.Yasumoto †, T.Higashino and K.Taniguchi Osaka University.
Multicast Routing Algorithms n Multicast routing n Flooding and Spanning Tree n Forward Shortest Path algorithm n Reversed Path Forwarding (RPF) algorithms.
SOS: Security Overlay Service Angelos D. Keromytis, Vishal Misra, Daniel Rubenstein- Columbia University ACM SIGCOMM 2002 CONFERENCE, PITTSBURGH PA, AUG.
Ion Stoica, Robert Morris, David Karger, M. Frans Kaashoek, Hari Balakrishnan MIT and Berkeley presented by Daniel Figueiredo Chord: A Scalable Peer-to-peer.
TOMA: A Viable Solution for Large- Scale Multicast Service Support Li Lao, Jun-Hong Cui, and Mario Gerla UCLA and University of Connecticut Networking.
The Vesta Parallel File System Peter F. Corbett Dror G. Feithlson.
An IP Address Based Caching Scheme for Peer-to-Peer Networks Ronaldo Alves Ferreira Joint work with Ananth Grama and Suresh Jagannathan Department of Computer.
IP1 The Underlying Technologies. What is inside the Internet? Or What are the key underlying technologies that make it work so successfully? –Packet Switching.
SIGCOMM 2001 Lecture slides by Dr. Yingwu Zhu Chord: A Scalable Peer-to-peer Lookup Service for Internet Applications.
The Replica Location Service The Globus Project™ And The DataGrid Project Copyright (c) 2002 University of Chicago and The University of Southern California.
Chapter 9 Hardware Addressing and Frame Type Identification 1.Delivering and sending packets 2.Hardware addressing: specifying a destination 3. Broadcasting.
Efficient P2P Search by Exploiting Localities in Peer Community and Individual Peers A DISC’04 paper Lei Guo 1 Song Jiang 2 Li Xiao 3 and Xiaodong Zhang.
BARD / April BARD: Bayesian-Assisted Resource Discovery Fred Stann (USC/ISI) Joint Work With John Heidemann (USC/ISI) April 9, 2004.
DHT-based unicast for mobile ad hoc networks Thomas Zahn, Jochen Schiller Institute of Computer Science Freie Universitat Berlin 報告 : 羅世豪.
CS 268: Project Suggestions Ion Stoica January 26, 2004.
Peer to Peer Network Design Discovery and Routing algorithms
Algorithms and Techniques in Structured Scalable Peer-to-Peer Networks
Click to edit Master title style Multi-Destination Routing and the Design of Peer-to-Peer Overlays Authors John Buford Panasonic Princeton Lab, USA. Alan.
Spring 2006CS 3321 Multicast Outline Link-state Multicast Distance-vector Multicast Protocol Independent Multicast.
A configuration method for structured P2P overlay network considering delay variations Tomoya KITANI (Shizuoka Univ. 、 Japan) Yoshitaka NAKAMURA (NAIST,
Design of a Robust Search Algorithm for P2P Networks
Two Peer-to-Peer Networking Approaches Ken Calvert Net Seminar, 23 October 2001 Note: Many slides “borrowed” from S. Ratnasamy’s Qualifying Exam talk.
INTERNET TECHNOLOGIES Week 10 Peer to Peer Paradigm 1.
The long, interesting tail of Indie TV Daniel Cutting, Aaron Quigley, Björn Landfeldt CTSB Workshop, Pervasive 2006, 7th May 2006.
Multicasting EECS June Multicast One-to-many, many-to-many communications Applications: – Teleconferencing – Database – Distributed computing.
17 th -21 st July nd APAN Meeting in Singapore ’06 Forwarding State Reduction for One-to-Many Group Communications Sahar A. Al-Talib (PhD. Candidate)
A Practical Performance Analysis of Stream Reuse Techniques in Peer-to-Peer VoD Systems Leonardo B. Pinho and Claudio L. Amorim Parallel Computing Laboratory.
DHT Routing Geometries and Chord
A Scalable content-addressable network
Paraskevi Raftopoulou, Euripides G.M. Petrakis
CS202 - Fundamental Structures of Computer Science II
Ch 17 - Binding Protocol Addresses
Presentation transcript:

Implicit group messaging in peer-to-peer networks Daniel Cutting, 28th April 2006 Advanced Networks Research Group

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 2 Outline. Motivation and problem Implicit groups Implicit group messaging (IGM) P2P model Evaluation

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 3 Motivation. It’s now very easy to publish content on the Internet: blogs, podcasts, forums, iPhoto “photocasting”, … More and more publishers of niche content Social websites like Flickr, YouTube, MySpace, etc. are gateways for connecting publishers and consumers Similar capability would also be desirable in P2P Collaboration and sharing without central authority No reliance on dedicated infrastructure No upfront costs, requirements

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 4 Problem. As more new niches are created, consumers need to search/filter more to find and collate varied content How can we connect many publishers and consumers? The publisher already knows the intended audience Can often describe the audience in terms of interests Does not know the names of individual audience members So, address them as an implicit group

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 5 Implicit groups. Explicit groups Members named Pre-defined by publisher or consumers need to join Wolfgang, Julie Implicit groups Members described Publisher defines “on the fly”, consumers don’t need to join Soccer & Brazil

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 6 Implicit group messaging. CAST messages from any source to any implicit group at any time in a P2P network Each peer described by attributes (capabilities, interests, services, …), e.g. “Soccer”, “Brazil” Implicit groups are specified as logical expressions of attributes, e.g. “(Soccer OR Football) AND Brazil” System delivers messages from sources to all peers matching target expressions

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 7 P2P model. A fully distributed, structured overlay network Peers maintain a logical Cartesian surface (like CAN) Each peer owns part of the surface and knows neighbours Peers store data hashed to their part of the surface Peers geometrically ROUTE to locations by passing from neighbour to neighbour Quadtree-based surface addressing Smoothly combine two major techniques for efficient CAST delivery to groups of any size

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 8 P2P model. Attribute partitioning: “attribute  peer” index for small groups Summary hashing: for reaching BIG groups Hybrid CAST algorithm: reactive multicast algorithm combining the above

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 9 Quadtree-based addressing. Surfaces can be any dimensionality d An address is a string of digits of base 2 d Map from an address to the surface using a quadtree decomposition Quadrants called extents

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 10 Attribute partitioning. A distributed index from each attribute to all peers Indices are stored at rendezvous points (RPs) on the surface by hashing the attribute to an address

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 11 Attribute partitioning (registration). Every peer registers at each of its attributes RPs Every registration includes IP address and all attributes

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 12 Attribute partitioning (CASTing). To CAST, select one term from target Route CAST to its RP RP finds all matches and unicasts to each

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 13 Attribute partitioning. Simple, works well for small groups and rare attributes Fast: just one overlay route followed by unicasts Fair: each peer responsible for similar number of attributes BUT common attribute  lots of registrations at one RP Heavy registration load on some unlucky peers ALSO big groups  many identical unicasts required Heavy link stress around RPs SO, in these cases share the load with your peers!

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 14 Summary hashing. Spreads registration and delivery load over many peers In addition to attribute registrations, each peer stores a back-pointer and a summary of their attributes at one other location on the surface Location of summary encodes its attributes Given a target expression, any peer can calculate all possible locations of matching summaries (and thus find pointers to all group members) Summaries distributed over surface; a few at each peer

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 15 Summary hashing (registration). Wolfgang {Soccer, Brazil} Benoit {Argentina, Soccer} Kim {Brazil} Julie {Soccer, Argentina, Brazil} Each peer creates a Bloom Filter {Soccer,Brazil} | Treat bits as an address 01101(0)  122 (2D) Store summary at that address on the surface

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 16 Summary hashing (CASTing). Can find all summaries matching a CAST by calculating all possible extents where they must be stored Convert CAST to Bloom Filter, replace 0s with wildcards Soccer & Brazil  {Soccer, Brazil}  *11* | Any peer with both attributes must have (at least) the 2nd, 3rd and 5th bits set in their summary address The wildcards may match 1s or 0s depending on what other attributes the peer has

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 17 Summary hashing (CASTing). Find extents with 2nd, 3rd and 5th bits are set {Soccer,Brazil}  *11*1(*) = {122, 123, 132, 133, 322, 323, 332, 333 }

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 18 Summary hashing (CASTing). Start anywhere and intersect unvisited extents with target expression Cluster remainder and forward towards each one until none remain When summaries are found, unicast to peers Called Directed Amortised Routing (DAR)

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 19 IGM on P2P summary. Peers store their summary on the surface and register at the RP for each of their attributes If an RP receives too many registrations for a common attribute, it simply drops them To CAST, a source peer picks any term from target expression and tries a Partition CAST (through an RP) If RP doesn’t know all matching members (because it’s a common attribute) or the group is too large to unicast to each one, it resorts to a DAR

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 20 Evaluation. 2,000 peer OMNeT++/INET simulation of campus-scale physical networks, 10 attributes per peer (Zipf) 8,000 random CASTs of various sizes (0 to ~900 members) Comparison to a Centralised server model Metrics Delay penalty Peer stress (traffic and storage)

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 21 Evaluation (delay penalty). Ratio of Average Delay (RAD) and Ratio Maximum Delay (RMD) compared to Centralised model 80% of CASTs have average delay less than 6 times Centralised model 95% have maximum delay less than 6 times Centralised

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 22 Evaluation (peer stress). Order of magnitude fewer maximum packets handled by any one peer over the Centralised server Higher average stress since more peers involved in delivering CASTs Even spread of registrations over peers

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 23 Conclusion Implicit groups are a useful way of addressing a group when you know what they have in common but not who they are IGM is also applicable to other applications Software updates to those who need them Distributed search engines P2P implicit group messaging is fast and efficient Does not unfairly stress any peers or network links Can deliver to arbitrary implicit groups with large size variation

Implicit group messaging April 28, 2006 Slide 24 Questions?