Wireless Networks

, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp 585–596 | Cite as

A popularity based content eviction scheme via betweenness-centrality caching approach for content-centric networking (CCN)

  • Kumari Nidhi LalEmail author
  • Anoj Kumar


In distinction to today’s IP-based, host-bound, Internet architecture, content-centric networking (CCN) emphasizes content by making it instantly addressable and routable. CCN has attracted attention in the research community as a means to cope with the increasing rate of Internet traffic. The host-to-host architecture is demonstrated to be inefficient in content distribution with a lot of bandwidth waste, and it is intricate to set up the network service because of the TCP/IPs location-dependence. CCN is a future Internet architecture which is directed to disentangle the above problems by location-independent content naming and world-wide content caching in a content router. An efficient caching is essential to reduce the delay and to enhance the performance of the network. In addition, a good cache replacement scheme is also necessary to decide which content should reside in the cache and which one should be evicted. The traditional caching replacement strategies schemes such as FIFO, LRU and MRU etc. are not updated as adaption of CCN from host-to-host Internet architecture. Before making replacement, a replacement strategy must performs the calculation of popularity of a content, local popularity of a content (intra-domain network), expected probability respective of demand for a content and instantaneous hit ratio. The traditional and existing popularity based cache replacement strategies do not consider mentioned key points. Therefore in this paper, we present a novel popularity based content eviction scheme for CCN with evaluation of local popularity of a content using the betweenness-centrality concept. The simulation results recommend that our proposed scheme can reliably accomplish the better performance across the other approaches proposed in this field.


Cache eviction Caching Centrality Content-centric network Performance analysis 


  1. 1.
    Koponen, T., et al. (2007). A data-oriented (and beyond) network architecture. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, Kyoto, Japan.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jacobson, V., et al. (2009). Networking named content. In Proceedings of ACM CoNEXT, p. 112.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Trossen, D., et al. (2011). Conceptual architecture: Principles, patterns and subcomponents descriptions.
  4. 4.
    Jokela, P., et al. (2009). LIPSIN: Line speed publish/subscribe inter-networking. In Procedings of ACM SIGCOMM, Barcelona, Spain.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Garcia, G., et al. (2011). COMET: Content mediator architecture for content-aware networks. In Proceedings of the future network and mobile summit 2011, Warsaw, Poland. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chai, W. K., et al. (2011). CURLING: Content-ubiquitous resolution and delivery infrastructure for next-generation services. IEEE Communications Magazine, 49(3), 112–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ahmed, S. H., Bouk, S. H., & Kim, D. (2016). Content-centric networks: An overview, applications and research challenges. Berlin: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yuemei, X., et al. (2016). Design and evaluation of coordinated in-network caching model for content centric networking. Computer Networks, 110, 266–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nakamura, R., & Ohsaki, H. (2017). Performance evaluation and improvement of large-scale content-centric networking. In 2017 international conference on information networking (ICOIN). IEEE.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Le, T.-A., Thai, N. D., & Vo, P. L. (2017). The performance of caching strategies in content centric networking. In 2017 international conference on information networking (ICOIN). IEEE.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li, B., Ma, M., & Yang, X. (2017). Perceptive forwarding in content-centric networks. IEEE Access.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kato, N. (2017). Challenges of content-centric mobile networks. IEEE Network, 31(1), 2–2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Xylomenos, G., Ververidis, C. N., Siris, V. A., Fotiou, N., Tsilopoulos, C., Vasilakos, X., Katsaros, K. V., & Polyzos, G. C. (2017). A survey of content-centric networking research. IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials, 16(2), 1024–1049 (Second Quarter). Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Li, Y., Xie, H., Wen, Y., Chow, C.-Y., & Zhang, Z.-L. (2015). How much to coordinate? Optimizing in-network caching in content-centric networks. IEEE Transactions on Network and Service Management, 12(3), 420–434. doi: 10.1109/TNSM.2015.2458271.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ren, Y., et al. (2017). Modeling content transfer performance in information-centric networking. Future Generation Computer Systems, 74, 12–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Qureshi, M. K., & Patt, Y. N. (2006). Utility-based cache partitioning: A low-overhead, high-performance, runtime mechanism to partition shared caches. In Proceedings of the 39th annual IEEE/ACM international symposium on microarchitecture. IEEE Computer Society.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lee, H. Y., & Nakao, A. (2013). User-assisted in-network caching in information-centric networking. Computer Networks, 57(16), 3142–3153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rossi, D., & Rossini, G. (2011). Caching performance of content centric networks under multi-path routing (and more). Relatrio tcnico, Telecom ParisTech.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bilal, M., & Kang, S.-G. (2017). A cache management scheme for efficient content eviction and replication in cache networks. IEEE Access, 5, 1692–1701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Domingues, G., et al. (2017). Enabling opportunistic search and placement in cache networks. Computer Networks, 119, 17–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Jelenkovic, P., Radovanovic, A., & Squillante, M. S. (2006). Critical sizing of lru caches with dependent requests. Journal of Applied Probability, 43(4), 1013–1027.MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Martina, V., Garetto, M., & Leonardi, E. (2014). A unified approach to the performance analysis of caching systems. In 2014 Proceedings IEEE, INFOCOM. IEEE.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Chai, W. K., et al. (2012). Cache less for more in information-centric networks. In Networking (pp. 27–40). Springer, Berlin.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bernardini, C., Silverston, T., & Festor, O. (2013). Mpc: Popularity-based caching strategy for content centric networks. In 2013 IEEE international conference on communications (ICC). IEEE.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Thar, K., et al. (2015). Efficient forwarding and popularity based caching for content centric network. In 2015 international conference on information networking (ICOIN). IEEE.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Li, W., Oteafy, S. M. A., & Hassanein, H. S. (2016). StreamCache: Popularity-based caching for adaptive streaming over information-centric networks. In 2016 IEEE international conference on communications (ICC). IEEE.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Li, W., et al. (2016). A popularity-driven caching scheme with dynamic multipath routing in CCN. In 2016 IEEE symposium on computers and communication (ISCC). IEEE.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hassan, S., et al. (2016). A popularity-based caching strategy for the future Internet. In ITU Kaleidoscope: ICTs for a sustainable world (ITU WT), 2016. IEEE.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Zhu, X., et al. (2016). A popularity-based collaborative caching algorithm for content-centric networking. Journal of Communications, 11, 10.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Chai, W. K., et al. (2013). Cache less for more in information-centric networks (extended version). Computer Communications, 36(7), 758–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Azimdoost, B., Westphal, C., & Sadjadpour, H. R. (2013). On the throughput capacity of content-centric networks. In 2013 25th international Teletraffic congress (ITC) (Vol. 10, no. 12, pp. 1–9).Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Fricker, C., Robert, P., & Roberts, J. (2012). A versatile and accurate approximation for LRU cache performance. In Proceedings of ITC 24.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Bradley, J. R., & Farnsworth, D. L. (2009). What Is Benford’s law? Teaching Statistics, 31(1), 2–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Font-Clos, F., Boleda, G., & Corral, A. (2013). A scaling law beyond Zipf’s law and its relation to Heaps’ law. New Journal of Physics, 15(9), 093033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Newby, G. B., Greenberg, J., & Jones, P. (2003). Open source software development and Lotka’s law: Bibliometric patterns in programming. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 54(2), 169–178.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringMNNIT AllahabadAllahabadIndia

Personalised recommendations