Tree-Based Analysis of Mesh Overlays for Peer-to-Peer Streaming

  • Bartosz Biskupski
  • Marc Schiely
  • Pascal Felber
  • René Meier
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5053)


Mesh-based P2P streaming approaches have been recently proposed as an interesting alternative to tree-based approaches. However, many properties of mesh overlays remain little understood as they are difficult to study due to the lack of a predefined structure. In this paper we show that when data is streamed through mesh overlays, it follows tree-based diffusion patterns and thereby mesh-based streaming can be studied in a similar manner to tree-based approaches. We identify properties of the diffusion trees that emerge in mesh overlays and compare them to optimal diffusion trees. We show that the emerging diffusion trees exhibit suboptimal height and are unbalanced, which results in increased buffering delay of mesh-based P2P systems, particularly in heterogeneous environments. We present an algorithm that adapts the mesh overlay to shorten diffusion trees and to reduce the buffering delay.


Network Throughput Data Chunk Upload Bandwidth Overlay Multicast Slow Node 
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.


  1. 1.
    Castro, M., Druschel, P., Kermarrec, A.M., Nandi, A., Rowstron, A., Singh, A.: SplitStream: High-bandwidth multicast in cooperative environments. In: SOSP 2003: Proceedings of the nineteenth ACM Symposium on Operating Systems Principles, New York, NY, USA, pp. 298–313 (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Pai, V.S., Kumar, K., Tamilmani, K., Sambamurthy, V., Mohr, A.E.: Chainsaw: Eliminating trees from overlay multicast. In: Castro, M., van Renesse, R. (eds.) IPTPS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3640, pp. 127–140. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Magharei, N., Rejaie, R.: PRIME: Peer-to-peer receiver-driven mesh-based streaming. In: 26th Annual IEEE Conference on Computer Communications IEEE INFOCOM 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Pianese, F., Perino, D., Keller, J., Biersack, E.: PULSE: an adaptive, incentive-based, unstructured p2p live streaming system. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia, Special Issue on Content Storage and Delivery in Peer-to-Peer Networks 9(6) (2007)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Venkatraman, V., Yoshida, K., Francis, P.: Chunkyspread: Heterogeneous unstructured end system multicast. In: Proceedings of 14th IEEE International Conference on Network Protocols (November 2006)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Magharei, N., Rejaie, R., Guo, Y.: Mesh or multiple-tree: A comparative study of live p2p streaming approaches. In: Proceedings of 26th IEEE International Conference on Computer Communication (INFOCOM), pp. 1424–1432 ( May 2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kumar, R., Liu, Y., Ross, K.: Stochastic fluid theory for p2p streaming systems. In: Proceedings of 26th IEEE International Conference on Computer Communication (INFOCOM), pp. 919–927 (May 2007)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Schiely, M., Renfer, L., Felber, P.: Self-organization in cooperative content distribution networks. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Symposium on Network Computing and Applications (NCA), pp. 109–116 (July 2005)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cohen, B.: Incentives build robustness in BitTorrent. In: the 1st Workshop on Economics of Peer-to-Peer Systems, Berkeley, CA, USA (June 2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Biskupski, B., Cunningham, R., Dowling, J., Meier, R.: High-bandwidth mesh-based overlay multicast in heterogeneous environments. In: AAA-IDEA 2006: Proceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Advanced Architectures and Algorithms for Internet Delivery and Applications, pp. 4–11. ACM Press, New York (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Biskupski, B., Cunningham, R., Meier, R.: Improving throughput and node proximity of p2p live video streaming through overlay adaptation. In: Proceedings of the 9th IEEE International Symposium on Multimedia (ISM 2007), pp. 245–252. IEEE Computer Society, Los Alamitos (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Strauss, J., Katabi, D., Kaashoek, F.: A measurement study of available bandwidth estimation tools. In: IMC 2003: Proceedings of the 3rd ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement, New York, NY, USA, pp. 39–44 (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nandi, A., Ngan, T.W., Singh, A., Druschel, P., Wallach, D.S.: Scrivener: Providing incentives in cooperative content distribution systems. In: Alonso, G. (ed.) Middleware 2005. LNCS, vol. 3790, pp. 270–291. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bartosz Biskupski
    • 1
  • Marc Schiely
    • 2
  • Pascal Felber
    • 2
  • René Meier
    • 1
  1. 1.Trinity College DublinIreland
  2. 2.University of NeuchâtelSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations