Dynamic Networks for Peer-to-Peer Systems Pierre Fraigniaud CNRS Lab. de Recherche en Informatique (LRI) Univ. Paris-Sud, Orsay Joint work with Philippe.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
P2P data retrieval DHT (Distributed Hash Tables) Partially based on Hellerstein’s presentation at VLDB2004.
Advertisements

Peer to Peer and Distributed Hash Tables
Pastry Peter Druschel, Rice University Antony Rowstron, Microsoft Research UK Some slides are borrowed from the original presentation by the authors.
CHORD – peer to peer lookup protocol Shankar Karthik Vaithianathan & Aravind Sivaraman University of Central Florida.
The Chord P2P Network Some slides have been borowed from the original presentation by the authors.
Distributed Hash Tables CPE 401 / 601 Computer Network Systems Modified from Ashwin Bharambe and Robert Morris.
Chord: A Scalable Peer-to-peer Lookup Service for Internet Applications Ion StoicaRobert Morris David Liben-NowellDavid R. Karger M. Frans KaashoekFrank.
Massively Distributed Database Systems Distributed Hash Spring 2014 Ki-Joune Li Pusan National University.
Common approach 1. Define space: assign random ID (160-bit) to each node and key 2. Define a metric topology in this space,  that is, the space of keys.
Small-world Overlay P2P Network
Presented by Elisavet Kozyri. A distributed application architecture that partitions tasks or work loads between peers Main actions: Find the owner of.
Peer to Peer File Sharing Huseyin Ozgur TAN. What is Peer-to-Peer?  Every node is designed to(but may not by user choice) provide some service that helps.
Topics in Reliable Distributed Systems Lecture 2, Fall Dr. Idit Keidar.
Introduction to Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Systems Gabi Kliot - Computer Science Department, Technion Concurrent and Distributed Computing Course 28/06/2006 The.
Distributed Computing Group A Self-Repairing Peer-to-Peer System Resilient to Dynamic Adversarial Churn Fabian Kuhn Stefan Schmid Roger Wattenhofer IPTPS.
Chord and CFS Philip Skov Knudsen Niels Teglsbo Jensen Mads Lundemann
Efficient Content Location Using Interest-based Locality in Peer-to-Peer Systems Presented by: Lin Wing Kai.
A Scalable and Load-Balanced Lookup Protocol for High Performance Peer-to-Peer Distributed System Jerry Chou and Tai-Yi Huang Embedded & Operating System.
Idit Keidar, Principles of Reliable Distributed Systems, Technion EE, Spring Principles of Reliable Distributed Systems Lecture 2: Peer-to-Peer.
Chord: A Scalable Peer-to-peer Lookup Service for Internet Applications Ion Stoica, Robert Morris, David Karger, M. Frans Kaashoek and Hari alakrishnan.
SCALLOP A Scalable and Load-Balanced Peer- to-Peer Lookup Protocol for High- Performance Distributed System Jerry Chou, Tai-Yi Huang & Kuang-Li Huang Embedded.
Object Naming & Content based Object Search 2/3/2003.
Chord-over-Chord Overlay Sudhindra Rao Ph.D Qualifier Exam Department of ECECS.
Secure Overlay Services Adam Hathcock Information Assurance Lab Auburn University.
Topics in Reliable Distributed Systems Fall Dr. Idit Keidar.
Decentralized Location Services CS273 Guest Lecture April 24, 2001 Ben Y. Zhao.
Locality Aware Network Solutions Dahlia Malkhi The Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Peer To Peer Distributed Systems Pete Keleher. Why Distributed Systems? l Aggregate resources! –memory –disk –CPU cycles l Proximity to physical stuff.
Structured P2P Network Group14: Qiwei Zhang; Shi Yan; Dawei Ouyang; Boyu Sun.
1 Koorde: A Simple Degree Optimal DHT Frans Kaashoek, David Karger MIT Brought to you by the IRIS project.
INTRODUCTION TO PEER TO PEER NETWORKS Z.M. Joseph CSE 6392 – DB Exploration Spring 2006 CSE, UT Arlington.
Using the Small-World Model to Improve Freenet Performance Hui Zhang Ashish Goel Ramesh Govindan USC.
Chord: A Scalable Peer-to-peer Lookup Protocol for Internet Applications Xiaozhou Li COS 461: Computer Networks (precept 04/06/12) Princeton University.
Optimisation des DHT à partir des propriétés physiques, logiques et sociologiques des clients Pierre Fraigniaud CNRS LRI, Univ. Paris-Sud
1 Distributed Hash Tables (DHTs) Lars Jørgen Lillehovde Jo Grimstad Bang Distributed Hash Tables (DHTs)
A Scalable Content-Addressable Network (CAN) Seminar “Peer-to-peer Information Systems” Speaker Vladimir Eske Advisor Dr. Ralf Schenkel November 2003.
Presentation 1 By: Hitesh Chheda 2/2/2010. Ion Stoica, Robert Morris, David Karger, M. Frans Kaashoek, Hari Balakrishnan MIT Laboratory for Computer Science.
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.
Chord: A Scalable Peer-to-peer Lookup Service for Internet Applications.
SIGCOMM 2001 Lecture slides by Dr. Yingwu Zhu Chord: A Scalable Peer-to-peer Lookup Service for Internet Applications.
1 Peer-to-Peer Technologies Seminar by: Kunal Goswami (05IT6006) School of Information Technology Guided by: Prof. C.R.Mandal, School of Information Technology.
Scalable Content- Addressable Networks Prepared by Kuhan Paramsothy March 5, 2007.
Dynamic Networks for Peer-to-Peer Systems Pierre Fraigniaud CNRS LRI, Univ. Paris Sud Joint work with Philippe Gauron.
1 Secure Peer-to-Peer File Sharing Frans Kaashoek, David Karger, Robert Morris, Ion Stoica, Hari Balakrishnan MIT Laboratory.
1 Distributed Hash Table CS780-3 Lecture Notes In courtesy of Heng Yin.
Chord Fay Chang, Jeffrey Dean, Sanjay Ghemawat, Wilson C. Hsieh, Deborah A. Wallach, Mike Burrows, Tushar Chandra, Andrew Fikes, Robert E. Gruber Google,
Idit Keidar, Principles of Reliable Distributed Systems, Technion EE, Spring Principles of Reliable Distributed Systems Lecture 2: Distributed Hash.
PRIN WOMEN PROJECT Research Unit: University of Naples Federico II G. Ferraiuolo
Algorithms and Techniques in Structured Scalable Peer-to-Peer Networks
Peer-to-Peer Networks 03 CAN (Content Addressable Network) Christian Schindelhauer Technical Faculty Computer-Networks and Telematics University of Freiburg.
LOOKING UP DATA IN P2P SYSTEMS Hari Balakrishnan M. Frans Kaashoek David Karger Robert Morris Ion Stoica MIT LCS.
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.
P2P Search COP6731 Advanced Database Systems. P2P Computing  Powerful personal computer Share computing resources P2P Computing  Advantages: Shared.
P2P Search COP P2P Search Techniques Centralized P2P systems  e.g. Napster, Decentralized & unstructured P2P systems  e.g. Gnutella.
1 Secure Peer-to-Peer File Sharing Frans Kaashoek, David Karger, Robert Morris, Ion Stoica, Hari Balakrishnan MIT Laboratory.
Plethora: A Locality Enhancing Peer-to-Peer Network Ronaldo Alves Ferreira Advisor: Ananth Grama Co-advisor: Suresh Jagannathan Department of Computer.
IPTPS 2005 Mirek Korzeniowski: Page 1 International Graduate School of Dynamic Intelligent Systems HEINZ NIXDORF INSTITUT University of Paderborn Algorithms.
CS694 - DHT1 Distributed Hash Table Systems Hui Zhang University of Southern California.
Incrementally Improving Lookup Latency in Distributed Hash Table Systems Hui Zhang 1, Ashish Goel 2, Ramesh Govindan 1 1 University of Southern California.
1 dBBlue:Low Diameter and Self-routing Bluetooth Scatternet Wen-Zhan Song, Xiang-Yang Li, Yu Wang and Weizhao Wang Department of Computer Science Illinois.
Peer-to-Peer File Sharing Systems Group Meeting Speaker: Dr. Xiaowen Chu April 2, 2004 Centre for E-transformation Research Department of Computer Science.
The Chord P2P Network Some slides taken from the original presentation by the authors.
Peer-to-Peer Networks 07 Degree Optimal Networks
The Chord P2P Network Some slides have been borrowed from the original presentation by the authors.
Peer-to-Peer Networks 07 Degree Optimal Networks
Know thy Neighbor’s Neighbor Better Routing for Skip Graphs and Small Worlds Moni Naor Udi Wieder.
DHT Routing Geometries and Chord
Koorde: A simple degree optimal DHT
MIT LCS Proceedings of the 2001 ACM SIGCOMM Conference
Presentation transcript:

Dynamic Networks for Peer-to-Peer Systems Pierre Fraigniaud CNRS Lab. de Recherche en Informatique (LRI) Univ. Paris-Sud, Orsay Joint work with Philippe Gauron (LRI)

Peer-to-Peer Systems (P2P) Opposed to the master-slave model A group of users (computers) share a common space in a decentralized manner. Objectives : Share data (music, movies, etc.) Share resources (computing facilities)

Main (Ideal) Characteristics No central server Cooperation between users Users can join and leave the system at any time Fault-tolerance Anonymity Security Self organization

Half-Decentralized data? Server (local) User Data

Decentralized Systems

Different Types of Lookups Flooding (e.g., Gnutella) Pro : simple Con : network load  non exhaustive Routing from A to B=h(d). Pro : exhaustive Difficulty : routing  Distributed Hash Tables (a.k.a. Content-Addressable Network)

Problem Design a dynamic network (i.e., nodes join and leave at their convenience) in which look-up routing and updating are “efficient”.

Constraints Fast updates Limited amount of control messages  small degree Fast lookups Short lookup routes  small diameter Balanced traffic No hot spot during lookup routing

Distributed Hash Tables Data d  h(d) = key  K Nodes = computers = users Arc (A,B)  A store the of B in its routing table Each computer stores a lookup table: key vs. Lookup routing performs on a key- basis

CAN “Content-Addressable Network” d-dimensionnal torus join Exp. degree = O(d) Exp. diameter = O(d n 1/d )

Chord d–dimensional hypercube M b a Keys of a x x+2 i Exp.degree = O(log n) Exp. diameter = O(log n)

Viceroy Butterfly Network Exp. degree = O(1) Exp. diameter = O(log n)

Why yet another DHT? Most of the existing DHTs have expected degree at least  (log n) CAN has expected degree O(d) but diameter O(dn 1/d ) Viceroy has degree O(1) and diameter O(log n), but is based on relatively complex machineries.

D2B Expected #key per node O(|K|/n) O(|K|log n/n) with high probability. Expected degree O(1) ; O(log n) w.h.p. Length of lookup route O(log n) w.h.p. Congestion minimal for a constant degree network: O(log n/n)

Underlying topology Based on the de Bruijn Network V = {binary sequences of length k} E = {(x 1 x 2 …x k )  (x 2 …x k y), y=0 or 1}

Node and key labels Node = binary sequence of length  m. Key = binary sequence of length = m.  up to 2 m nodes and keys In practice, set m=128 or even 256 The key  is stored by node x if and only if x is a prefix of .

Universal Prefix Set Let W i, i=1,…,q, be q binary sequences. The set S={W 1,W 2,…,W q } is a universal prefix set if and only if, for any infinite binary sequence B, there is one and only one W i which is a prefix of B. Example: {0,11,100,1010,10110,10111} Remark: {e} where e is the empty sequence is a universal prefix set. By construction, the set of nodes in D2B is a universal prefix set.

Routing Connections Parents Children

Children Connections and Routing x 1 x 2 ………x k x 2 …x j x 1 x 2 ………x k x 2 ………x k y 1 y 2 …y j The set {y 1 y 2 …y j } is a UPS

Join Procedure (1/3) A joining node u contacts an entry point v in the network; Node u selects a m-bit binary sequence L at random: its preliminary label; A request for join is routed from v to the node w that is in charge of key L;

Join Procedure (2/3) Node w labeled x 1 x 2 ……x k extends its label to x 1 x 2 ……x k 0 Node u takes label x 1 x 2 ……x k 1 Node w transfers to u all keys K such that x 1 x 2 ……x k 1 is prefix of K.

Join Procedure (3/3) x 1 x 2 ………x k x 2 ………x k y 1 y 2 …y j x 1 x 2 ………x k 0 x 2 ………x k 0y 2 …y j x 1 x 2 ………x k 1

Example {}

Example

Example

Example

Example

Example

Example

Example

Example

Example

#keys per node (1/2) 02 m -1 x x 1 x 2 …x k  x 1 x 2 …x k** ………… ** y

#keys per node (2/2) Devide K in n/(c log n) intervals, each containing c log n |K|/n keys. Let X = #nodes in interval I starting at x n Bernouilli trials with probability p = c log n/n Chernoff bound: Prob(|∑X i -np|>k)<2e -k 2 /3np  Prob(|X-c log n|>(3c) 1/2 log n) < 2/n  W.h.p., there is at least one node in I  W.h.p., a given node manages O(|K|log n/n) keys

Lookup routing Node x 1 x 2 ………x k looks for key  1  2 ……………  m  x 2 ………x k  1 …  h  x 3 ………x k  1 …  h  h+1 ……………  h+r  x 4 ………x k  1 …  h  h+1 ……  h+i  x 5 ………x k  1 …  h  h+1 ……  h+i  h+i+1 …  h+i+s  x 6 …x t  x 7 …x t  1 ……  d At most k hops to reach the node in charge of the key  1  2 ……………  m

Length of node label (1/2) 02 m -1 x x 1 x 2 …x k  x 1 x 2 …x k** ………… ** I |I|=c |K| log n/n y

Length of node-label (2/2) Prob(|X-c log n|>(3c) 1/2 log n) < 2/n  W.h.p., at most O(log n) nodes in I  x manages at least |I|/2 O(log n) keys  k  m – log|I| + O(log n)  k  O(log n)  W.h.p., a lookup route is of length O(log n)

Degree and congestion W.h.p., degree = O(log n) using similar techniques (expected degree O(1)) Congestion = proba that a node is traversed by a lookup from a random node to a random key = O(log n/n) (Minimum possible for a constant- degree network)

Summary: Expected properties UpdateLookupCongestion CANO(d)O(dn 1/d )O(d/n 1-1/d ) Small worldO(1)O(log 2 n)O(log 2 n/n) ChordO(log n) O(log n/n) ViceroyO(1)O(log n)O(log n/n) D2BO(1)O(log n)O(log n/n)

Extensions d-dimensional D2B Degree = d Lookups = log n / log d Fault-tolerance Mapping the physical topology

References [1] I. Abraham, B. Awerbuch, Y. Azar, Y. Bartal, D. Malkhi, and E. Pavlov. A Generic Scheme for Building Overlay Networks in Adversarial Scenarios. In Int. Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium (IPDPS), April [2] P. Fraigniaud and P. Gauron. The Content- Addressable Network D2B. Technical Report, LRI, Univ. Paris Sud, Jan [3] M. Kaashoek and D. Karger. Koorde: A simple degree- optimal distributed hash table. In Int. Peer-to-peer Processing Symposium (IPTPS), Feb [4] M. Naor and U. Wieder. Novel Architecture for P2P Applications: the Continuous-Discrete Approach. To appear in ACM Symp. on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures (SPAA), June 2003.