Advertisement

Generic Emergent Overlays in Arbitrary Peer Identifier Spaces

  • Wojciech Galuba
  • Karl Aberer
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4725)

Abstract

Unstructured overlay networks are driven by simple protocols that are easy to analyze and implement. The lack of structure, however, leads to weak message delivery guarantees and poor scaling. Structured overlays impose a global overlay topology that is then maintained by all peers in a complex protocol. In contrast to unstructured approaches the structured overlays are efficient and scalable, but leave little flexibility in how their topology can be adapted to the needs of the application.

We propose a generic overlay maintenance and routing algorithm that combines the simplicity of the unstructured overlays and the scalability of the structured approaches, while allowing the application to define its own peer identifier space. The overlay topology is not explicitly defined but emerges in a self-organized way as the result of simple maintenance rules. Independently of the identifier space used, our algorithm exhibits logarithmic scaling of the average routing path length and the average node degree.

The proposed maintenance and routing algorithm is simple and places few constraints on how peers can open their connections. This together with the ability to adjust both the identifier space and the tradeoff between the path length and the node degree makes the overlay customizable in ways that are not possible in the existing approaches.

Keywords

Node Degree Overlay Network Average Path Length Distribute Hash Table Connection Request 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Stoica, I., Morris, R., Karger, D., Kaashoek, F., Balakrishnan, H.: Chord: A scalable Peer-To-Peer lookup service for internet applications, pp. 149–160.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aberer, K., Cudré-Mauroux, P., Datta, A., Despotovic, Z., Hauswirth, M., Punceva, M., Schmidt, R.: P-Grid: a self-organizing structured P2P system. SIGMOD Record 32(3), 29–33 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zhao, B.Y., Kubiatowicz, J.D., Joseph, A.D.: Tapestry: An infrastructure for fault-tolerant wide-area location and routing. Technical Report UCB/CSD-01-1141, UC Berkeley (April 2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Rowstron, A., Druschel, P.: Pastry: Scalable, decentralized object location, and routing for large-scale peer-to-peer systems. In: Guerraoui, R. (ed.) Middleware 2001. LNCS, vol. 2218, pp. 329–337. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Maymounkov, P., Mazieres, D.: Kademlia: A peer-to-peer information system based on the xor metric (2002)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bharambe, A.R., Agrawal, M., Seshan, S.: Mercury: supporting scalable multi-attribute range queries. In: SIGCOMM 2004. Proceedings of the 2004 conference on Applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications, pp. 353–366. ACM Press, New York (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ratnasamy, S., Francis, P., Handley, M., Karp, R., Schenker, S.: A scalable content-addressable network. In: Proceedings of the 2001 conference on applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications, pp. 161–172. ACM Press, New York (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Manku, G., Bawa, M., Raghavan, P.: Symphony: Distributed hashing in a small world (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Aberer, K., Alima, L.O., Ghodsi, A., Girdzijauskas, S., Hauswirth, M., Haridi, S.: The essence of P2P: A reference architecture for overlay networks. In: P2P 2005, The 5th IEEE International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing (2005)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Clarke, I., Sandberg, O., Wiley, B., Hong, T.W.: Freenet: A distributed anonymous information storage and retrieval system. In: Federrath, H. (ed.) Designing Privacy Enhancing Technologies. LNCS, vol. 2009, pp. 46–53. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ripeanu, M.: Peer-to-peer architecture case study: Gnutella network (2001)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
  13. 13.
    Bustamante, F., Qiao, Y.: Friendships that last: Peer lifespan and its role in (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
  15. 15.
    Kleinberg, J.: The Small-World Phenomenon: An Algorithmic Perspective. In: Proceedings of the 32nd ACM Symposium on Theory of Computing, ACM Press, New York (2000)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Li, J., Stribling, J., Morris, R., Kaashoek, M.F.: Bandwidth-efficient management of DHT routing tables. In: Proceedings of the 2nd USENIX Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation (NSDI 2005), Boston, Massachusetts (May 2005)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Newman, M.: The structure and function of complex networks (2003)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Albert, R., Barabási, A.: Statistical mechanics of complex networks.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Watts, D.J., Strogatz, S.H.: Collective dynamics of ”small-world” networks. Nature 393, 440–442 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wojciech Galuba
    • 1
  • Karl Aberer
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computer and Communication Sciences, Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL)Switzerland

Personalised recommendations