Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications

, Volume 4, Issue 3, pp 259–273 | Cite as

Fuzzynet: Ringless routing in a ring-like structured overlay

  • Sarunas Girdzijauskas
  • Wojciech Galuba
  • Vasilios Darlagiannis
  • Anwitaman Datta
  • Karl Aberer
Article

Abstract

Many structured overlay networks rely on a ring invariant as a core network connectivity element. The responsibility ranges of the participating peers and navigability principles (greedy routing) heavily depend on the ring structure. For correctness guarantees, each node needs to eagerly maintain its immediate neighboring links - the ring invariant. However, the ring maintenance is an expensive task and it may not even be possible to maintain the ring invariant continuously under high churn, particularly as the network size grows. Furthermore, routing anomalies in the network, peers behind firewalls and Network Address Translators (NATs) create non-transitivity effects, which inevitably lead to the violation of the ring invariant. We argue that reliance on the ring structure is a serious impediment for real life deployment and scalability of structured overlays. In this paper we propose an overlay called Fuzzynet, which does not rely on the ring invariant, yet has all the functionalities of structured overlays. Fuzzynet takes the idea of lazy overlay maintenance further by dropping any explicit connectivity and data maintenance requirement, relying merely on the actions performed when new Fuzzynet peers join the network. We show that with sufficient amount of neighbors (O(log N), comparable to traditional structured over-lays), even under high churn, data can be retrieved in Fuzzynet w.h.p. We validate our novel design principles by simulations as well as PlanetLab experiments and compare them with ring based overlays.

Keywords

Peer-to-peer systems Structured overlays Small-world networks Routing Ring Ringless overlays 

References

  1. 1.
    Aberer K (2001) P-Grid: a self-organizing access structure for P2P information systems. In: Proceedings of the Sixth International Conference on Cooperative Information Systems (CoopIS)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Angluin D, Aspnes J, Chen J, Wu Y, Yin Y (2005) Fast construction of overlay networks. In: In 17th ACM Symposium on Parallelism in Algorithms and Architectures(SPAA 2005),Las Vegas, NV, USAGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aspnes J, Kirsch J, Krishnamurthy A (2004) Load balancing and locality in range-queriable data structures. In: PODC2004Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aspnes J, Shah G (2003) Skip graphs. In: SODAGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bhagwan R, Tati K, Cheng Y, Savage S, Voelker GM (2004) Total recall: system support for automated availability management. In: The ACM/USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and ImplementationGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bharambe A, Agrawal M, Seshan S (2004) Mercury: supporting scalable multi-attribute range queries. In: ACM SIGCOMM, Portland, USAGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Clarke I, Sandberg O, Wiley B, Hong TW (2001) Freenet: a distributed anonymous information storage and retrieval system. In: Designing Privacy Enhancing Technologies: International Workshop on Design Issues in Anonymity and UnobservabilityGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Datta A, Hauswirth M, Aberer K (2003) Updates in highly unreliable, Replicated peer-to-peer systems. In: Proceedings of the 23rd International Conference on Distributed Computing SystemsGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Freedman MJ, Lakshminarayanan K, Rhea S, Stoica I (2005) Non-transitive connectivity and dhts. In: WORLDS’05: Proceedings of the 2nd conference on Real, Large Distributed Systems, pp. 10-10. USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USAGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Galuba W, Aberer K (2007) Generic emergent overlays in arbitrary peer identifier spaces. In: 2nd International Workshop on Self-Organizing Systems (IWSOS 2007), vol. 4725, pp. 88–102Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ganesan E, Pradhan DK (2003) Wormhole routing in De Bruijn Networks and Hyper-DeBruijn Networks. In: ISCASGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ganesan P, Bawa M, Garcia-Molina H (2004) Online balancing of range-partitioned data with applications to peer-to-peer systems. In: VLDBGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ganesan P, Sun Q, Garcia-Molina H (2003) Yappers: a peer-to-peer lookup service over arbitrary topology. In: INFOCOM’03, San Francisco, USAGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Girdzijauskas S, Datta A, Aberer K (2005) On small world graphs in non-uniformly distributed key spaces. In: NetDB2005, Tokyo, JapanGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Girdzijauskas S, Datta A, Aberer K (2006) Oscar: small-world overlay for realistic key distributions. In: DBISP2P 2006, Seoul, KoreaGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Girdzijauskas S, Datta A, Aberer K (2007) Oscar: a data-oriented overlay for heterogeneous environments. In: ICDE 2007. URL http://www.icde2007.org/icde/
  17. 17.
    Girdzijauskas S, Datta A, Aberer K (2010) Structured overlay for heterogeneous environments: design and evaluation of Oscar. ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems (TAAS), vol. 5, FebruaryGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Guha S, Daswani N, Jain R (2006) An experimental study of the skype peer-to-peer voip system. In: Proceedings of The 5th International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems (IPTPS 06)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Harvey NJA, Jones BM, Saroiu S, Theimer M, Wolman A (2003) Skipnet: a scalable overlay network with practical locality properties. In: USITS’03, Seattle, WA (March 2003)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
  21. 21.
    Kleinberg J (2000) The small-world phenomenon: An algorithmic perspective. In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM Symposium on Theory of ComputingGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Klemm F, Girdzijauskas S, Le Boudec JY, Aberer K (2007) On routing in distributed hash tables. In: The Seventh IEEE International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing. URL http://www.p2p2007.org
  23. 23.
    Kong J, Roychowdhury V (2007) Price of structured routing and its mitigation in p2p systems under churn. In: P2P’07, Galway, IrelandGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
  25. 25.
    Li X, Misra J, Plaxton G (2004) Active and concurrent topology maintenance. In: In the 18th Annual Conference on Distributed Computing (DISC)Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Liben-Nowell D, Balakrishnan H, Karger DR (2002) Analysis of the evolution of peer-to-peer systems. In: PODC2002, New York, USAGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Malkhi D, Naor M, Ratajczak D (2002) Viceroy: a scalable and dynamic emulation of the butterfly. In: Proceedings of the 21st ACM Symposium on Principles of Distributed ComputingGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Manku GS, Bawa M, Raghavan P (2003) Symphony: distributed hashing in a small world. In: 4th USENIX Symposium on Internet Technologies and Systems, USITSGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Maymounkov P, Mazieres D (2002) Kademlia: a peer-to-peer information system based on the xor metric. URL citeseer.ist.psu.edu/maymounkov02kademlia.html
  30. 30.
    Mislove A, Post A, Haeberlen A, Druschel P (2006) Experiences in building and operating epost, a reliable peer-to-peer application. In: EuroSys ‘06: Proceedings of the ACM SIGOPS/EuroSys European Conference on Computer Systems 2006, pp. 147–159. ACM, New York, NY, USA. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1217935.1217950
  31. 31.
    Rhea S, Chun B, Kubiatowicz J, Shenker S (2005) Fixing the embarrassing slowness of opendht on planetlab. URL citeseer.ist.psu.edu/rhea05fixing.html
  32. 32.
    Rhea S, Geels D, Roscoe T, Kubiatowicz J (2003) Handling Churn in a DHT. Tech. Rep. Technical Report UCB//CSD-03-1299. The University of California, Berkeley, Univ. Paris-SudGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Rhea S, Godfrey B, Karp B, Kubiatowicz J, Ratnasamy S, Shenker S, Stoica I, Yu H (2005) Opendht: a public dht service and its uses. In: SIGCOMM ‘05: Proceedings of the 2005 conference on Applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications, pp. 73–84. ACM, New York, NY, USA. http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1080091.1080102
  34. 34.
    Rowstron A, Druschel P (2001) Pastry: scalable, distributed object location and routing for large-scale peer- to-peer systems. In: IFIP/ACM International Conference on Distributed Systems Platforms (Middle- ware), Heidelberg, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Schlosser M, Sintek M, Decker S, Nejdl W. (2002) Hypercup - hypercubes, ontologies and efficient search on p2p networks. In: Workshop on Agents and P2P Computing, 2002Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Shaker A, Reeves DS (2005) Self-stabilizing structured ring topology p2p systems. In: Fifth IEEE International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing (P2P’05)Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Stoica I, Morris R, Karger D, Kaashoek F, Balakrishnan H (2001) Chord: a scalable peer-to-peer lookup service for internet applications. In: Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMMGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Terpstra WW, Leng C, Buchmann AP (2007) Bubblestorm: resilient, probabilistic, and exhaustive peer- to-peer search. In: SIGCOMM’07, Kyoto, JapanGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Wang W, Chang H, Zeitoun A, Jamin S (2004) Characterizing guarded hosts in peer-to-peer file sharing systems. In: In Proceedings of IEEE Global Communications Conference, Global Internet and Next Generation NetworksGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science + Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sarunas Girdzijauskas
    • 1
  • Wojciech Galuba
    • 2
  • Vasilios Darlagiannis
    • 3
  • Anwitaman Datta
    • 4
  • Karl Aberer
    • 5
  1. 1.Swedish Institute of Computer Science (SICS)KistaSweden
  2. 2.Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL)LausanneSwitzerland
  3. 3.Informatics and Telematics Institute, Center of Research and Technology HellasThermi-ThessalonikiGreece
  4. 4.Nanyang Technological University (NTU)NanyangSingapore
  5. 5.Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL), School of Computer and Communication SciencesLausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations