Robustness in Network Protocols and Distributed Applications of the Internet

  • Jürgen Vogel
  • Jörg Widmer


The Internet connects computers from all over the world for a fast and reliable exchange of data, e.g., from e-mail or Web applications. Considering its sheer size and heterogeneity, the Internet is the most complex computer system ever built. It has coped with a tremendous growth, has handled many critical situations, and, overall, does work quite well. This is because robustness was a major goal from the very beginning, which led to a network design that is self-regulatory, redundant, scalable, and updatable. In this chapter, we will discuss these design principles and the Internet’s architecture, the core protocols IP and TCP, protocols for wireless communication, and applications such as the popular BitTorrent file exchange.


Medium Access Control Congestion Control Optimize Link State Route Internet Protocol Address Internet Engineer Task Force 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Akyildiz, I., Wang, X., and Wang, W. (2005). Wireless Mesh networks: a survey. Computer Networks, 47(4):445–487.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Albert, R., Jeong, H., and Barabasi, A.-L. (2000). Error and attack tolerance of complex networks. Nature, 406:378–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Allman, M., Paxson, V., and Stevens, W. (1999). TCP Congestion Control. Internet Request For Comments, IETF, RFC-2581.Google Scholar
  4. Anderson, T., Shenker, S., Stoica, I., and Wetherall, D. (2003). Design guidelines for robust Internet protocols. ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communications Review, 33(1):125–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bicket, J., Aguayo, D., Biswas, S., and Morris, R. (2005). Architecture and evaluation of an unplanned 802.11b Mesh network. In Proceedings of the 11th ACM Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom), pages 31–42, Cologne, Germany. ACM, New York, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  6. Bush, R. and Meyer, D. (2002). Some Internet architectural guidelines and philosophy. Internet Request For Comments, IETF, RFC-3439.Google Scholar
  7. Carpenter, B. (1996). Architectural principles of the Internet. Internet Request For Comments, IETF, RFC-1958.Google Scholar
  8. Cerf, V. and Kahn, R. (1974). A protocol for packet network intercommunication. IEEE Transactions on Communications, 22(5):627–641.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Clark, D. (1988). The design philosophy of the DARPA Internet protocols. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM Symposium on Communications Architectures and Protocols, pages 106–114, Stanford, CA, August 16–18. ACM, New York.Google Scholar
  10. Clark, D. and Blumenthal, M. (2001). Rethinking the design of the Internet: the end to end arguments vs. the brave new world. ACM Transactions on Internet Technology, 1(1):70–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Clark, D., Wroclawski, J., Sollins, K., and Braden, R. (2002). Tussle in cyberspace: defining tomorrow’s Internet. In Proceedings of the 2002 ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Applications, Technologies, Architectures, and Protocols for Computer Communications, pages 347–356, Pittsburgh, PA, August 19–23. ACM, New York.Google Scholar
  12. Clausen, T. (2004). Comparative study of routing protocols for mobile ad hoc networks. Technical Report inria-00071448, INRIA, France.Google Scholar
  13. Clausen, T. and Jacquet, P. (2003). Optimized Link State Routing Protocol (OLSR). Internet Request For Comments, IETF, RFC-3626.Google Scholar
  14. Coffman, K. and Odlyzko, A. (2002). Handbook of Massive Data Sets, chapter Internet growth: is there a “Moore’s Law” for data traffic?, pages 47–93. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Norwell, MA.Google Scholar
  15. Cohen, B. (2003). Incentives build robustness in BitTorrent. In Proceedings of Workshop on Economics of Peer-to-Peer Systems (P2PEcon), Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  16. Doyle, J. C., Alderson, D., Li, L., Low, S. H., Roughan, M., Shalunov, S., Tanaka, R., and Willinger, W. (2005). The “robust yet fragile” nature of the Internet. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 102(41):14497–14502.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gray, J. (1986). Why do computers stop and what can be done about it? In Proceedings Symposium on Reliability in Distributed Software and Database Systems, pages 3–12, Los Angeles, CA.Google Scholar
  18. Greenberg, S. and Marwood, D. (1994). Real-time groupware as a distributed system: concurrency control and its effect on the interface. In Proceedings of the 1994 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work, pages 207–217, Chapel Hill, NC, October 22-26. ACM, New York.Google Scholar
  19. Handley, M. (2006). Why the Internet only just works. BT Technology Journal, 24(3):119–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Heylighen, F. and Gershenson, C. (2003). The meaning of self-organization in computing. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 18(4):72–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Iannaccone, G., Chuah, C.-N., Mortier, R., Bhattacharyya, S., and Diot, C. (2002). Analysis of link failures in an IP backbone. In Proceedings of the 2nd ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Internet Measurment (IMW), pages 237–242, Marseille, France, November 6–8. ACM, New York.Google Scholar
  22. IEEE 802.11 (1999). IEEE Standards for Information Technology – Telecommunications and Information Exchange between Systems – Local and Metropolitan Area Network – Specific Requirements – Part 11: Wireless LAN Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications.Google Scholar
  23. IEEE 802.15.1 (2005). IEEE Standard for Information technology – Telecommunications and information exchange between systems – Local and metropolitan area networks – Specific requirements. Part 15.1: Wireless Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical Layer (PHY) Specifications for Wireless Personal Area Networks.Google Scholar
  24. ITU (2007). Internet indicators: subscribers, users and broadband subscribers in 2006. Available at:
  25. Izal, M., Urvoy-Keller, G., Biersack, E., Felber, P., Hamra, A., and Garces-Erice, L. (2004). Dissecting BitTorrent: five months in a Torrent’s lifetime. In Proceedings of 5th Passive and Active Measurement Workshop (PAM), pages 1–11, Juan-les-Pins, France, April 19–20.Google Scholar
  26. Jacobson, V. (1988). Congestion avoidance and control. In ACM SIGCOMM, Stanford, CA, pages 314–329.Google Scholar
  27. Jaiswal, S., Iannaccone, G., Diot, C., Kurose, J., and Towsley, D. (2003). Measurement and classification of out-of-sequence packets in a tier-1 IP backbone. In Proceedings of 22nd IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (INFOCOM), pages 1199–1209, San Francisco, CA, March 30–April 03.Google Scholar
  28. Kamerman, A. and Monteban, L. (1997). WaveLAN II: a high-performance wireless LAN for the unlicensed band. Technical report, Bell Labs Technical Journal.Google Scholar
  29. Kelly, F. P., Maulloo, A., and Tan, D. (1998). Rate control for communication networks: shadow prices, proportional fairness and stability. Journal of the Operational Research Society, 49(3):237–252.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. Kleinrock, L. and Kamoun, F. (1977). Hierarchical routing for large networks, performance evaluation and optimization. Computer Networks, 1(3):155–174.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  31. Labovitz, C., Ahuja, A., Bose, A., and Jahanian, F. (2000). Delayed internet routing convergence. In Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, Stockholm, Sweden, pages 175–187, Stockholm, Sweden, August 28–September 01.Google Scholar
  32. Lamport, L. (1978). Time, clocks, and the ordering of events in a distributed system. Communications of the ACM, 21(7):558–565.zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Laneman, J. N., Wornell, G. W., and Tse, D. (2001). An efficient protocol for realizing cooperative diversity in wireless networks. In Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Information Theory (ISIT), page 294, Washington, D.C., June 24–29.Google Scholar
  34. Laneman, J. N., Wornell, G. W., and Tse, D. (2004). Cooperative diversity in wireless networks: efficient protocols and outage behavior. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory, 50(12):3062–3080.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  35. Markopoulou, A., Iannaccone, G., Bhattacharyya, S., Chuah, C., and Diot, C. (2004). Characterization of failures in an IP backbone. In Proceedings of 23rd AnnualJoint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (INFOCOM’04), pages 2307–2317, Hong King, China, March 7–11.Google Scholar
  36. Mauve, M., Vogel, J., Hilt, V., and Effelsberg, W. (2004). Local-lag and timewarp: providing consistency for replicated continuous applications. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, 6(1): 45–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Mockapetris, P. (1987). Domain names–oncepts and facilities. Internet Request For Comments, IETF, RFC-1034.Google Scholar
  38. Morse, K. (1996). Interest management in large-scale distributed simulations. Technical Report ICS-TR-96-27, Department of Information and Computer Science, University of California, Irvine, CA.Google Scholar
  39. Moy, J. (1998). OSPF Version 2. Internet Request For Comments, IETF, RFC-2328.Google Scholar
  40. Nandagopal, T., Kim, T., Gao, X., and Bharghavan, V. (2000). Achieving MAC layer fairness in wireless packet networks. In Proceedings of the 6th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking (MobiCom), pages 87–98, Boston, MA. ACM, New York.Google Scholar
  41. Oppenheimer, D., Ganapathi, A., and Patterson, D. (2003). Why do Internet services fail, and what can be done about it? In Proceedings of the 4th Conference on USENIX Symposium on Internet Technologies and Systems (USITS), Seattle, WA, USA, March 26-28. USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA.Google Scholar
  42. Palmer, C., Siganos, G., Faloutsos, M., Faloutsos, C., and Gibbons, P. (2001). The connectivity and fault-tolerance of the Internet topology. In Proceedings of Workshop on Network-Related Data Management (NRDM), Santa Barbara, CA.Google Scholar
  43. Paxson, V. (1999). End-to-end Internet packet dynamics. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 7(3):277–292.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Perkins, C., Belding-Royer, E., and Das, S. (2003). Ad hoc On-Demand Distance Vector (AODV) Routing. Internet Request For Comments, IETF, RFC-3561.Google Scholar
  45. Postel, J. (1980). User Datagram Protocol. Internet Request For Comments, IETF, RFC-768.Google Scholar
  46. Postel, J. (1981a). Internet Protocol. Internet Request For Comments, IETF, RFC-791.Google Scholar
  47. Postel, J. (1981b). Transmission Control Protocol. Internet Request For Comments, IETF, RFC-793.Google Scholar
  48. Pouwelse, J. A., Garbacki, P., Epema, D. H. J., and Sips, H. J. (2005). The BitTorrent P2P file-sharing system: measurements and analysis. In Proceedings of the 4th International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems (IPTPS), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages 205–216, Ithaca, NY, February 24-25. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg.Google Scholar
  49. Proakis, J. (2000). Digital Communications, McGraw Hill Higher Education, New York.Google Scholar
  50. Raman, S. and McCanne, S. (1999). A model, analysis, and protocol framework for soft state-based communication. In Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Applications, Technologies, Architectures, and Protocols for Computer Communication, pages 15–25, Cambridge, MA, August 30-September 03. ACM, New York.Google Scholar
  51. Rekhter, Y., Li, T., and Hares, S. (2006). A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4). Internet Request For Comments, IETF, RFC-4271.Google Scholar
  52. Sadeghi, B., Kanodia, V., Sabharwal, A., and Knightly, E. (2005). OAR: an opportunistic auto-rate media access protocol for ad hoc networks. ACM Wireless Networks, 11(1):39–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Saltzer, J., Reed, D., and Clark, D. (1984). End-to-end arguments in systems design. ACM Transactions on Computer Systems, 2(3):277–288.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Singhal, S. and Zyda, M. (1999). Networked Virtual Environments: Design and Implementation. Addison Wesley, Upper Saddle River, NJ.Google Scholar
  55. Sridharan, A. and Guerin, R. (2005). Making IGP routing robust to link failures. In Proceedings of the 4th International IFIP-TC6 Networking Conference, pages 634–646, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, May 2-6.Google Scholar
  56. Sun, C., Jia, X., Zhang, Y., Yang, Y., and Chen, D. (1998). Achieving convergence, causality preservation and intention preservation in real-time cooperative editing systems. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction, 5(1):63–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Sun, C., Yang, Y., Zhang, Y., and Chen, D. (1996). Distributed concurrency control in real-time cooperative editing systems. In Proceedings of the Asian Computing Science Conference, Singapore, pages 85–95, Singapore, December 2-5.Google Scholar
  58. Tanenbaum, A. (2002). Computer Networks. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, 4th edition.Google Scholar
  59. Vogel, J. (2004). Consistency algorithms and protocols for distributed interactive applications. PhD thesis, University of Mannheim, Germany.Google Scholar
  60. Vogel, J., Geyer, W., Cheng, L.-T., and Muller, M. (2004). Consistency control for synchronous and asynchronous collaboration based on shared objects and activities. Computer Supported Cooperative Work, 13(5–6):573–602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Vogel, J., Mauve, M., Hilt, V., and Effelsberg, W. (2003). Late join algorithms for distributed interactive applications. ACM/Springer Multimedia Systems, 9(4):327–336.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Wei, D. X., Jin, C., Low, S. H., and Hegde, S. (2006). Fast TCP: motivation, architecture, algorithms, performance. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 14(6):1246–1259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Widmer, J., Denda, R., and Mauve, M. (2001). A survey on TCP-friendly congestion control. IEEE Network Magazine “Control of Best Effort Traffic”, 15(3):28–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Willinger, W. and Doyle, J. (2002). Robustness and the Internet: design and evolution. Available at:
  65. Xu, L., Harfoush, K., and Rhee, I. (2004). Binary increase congestion control for fast, long distance networks. In Proceedings of 23rd Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (INFOCOM’04), pages 2514–2524, Hong King, China, March 7–11. IEEE Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Limited 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.European Media LaboratoryHeidelbergGermany
  2. 2.DoCoMo Communications, Laboratories EuropeMunichGermany

Personalised recommendations