Trading Off Resources Between Overlapping Overlays

  • Brian F. Cooper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4290)


Many different overlays with different properties have been proposed. Rather than using one overlay for all applications, it is likely that multiple overlapping overlays will be deployed on the same computing resources for different purposes. We present an architecture, called ODIN-S, for mediating the resources used by overlapping overlays. We can specify priorities for different overlays, and then allow ODIN-S to allocate computation and bandwidth across the network to respect priorities. The key features of ODIN-S include a common middleware runtime supporting multiple overlay logics, and “filters” for throttling, ordering and dropping messages in order to manage resources. We present experimental results that demonstrate ODIN-S’s ability to manage resources between different types of overlapping overlays.


Multicast Tree Average Throughput Upload Bandwidth Bottleneck Node Weighted Fair Queue 
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.
    Adamic, L., Lukose, R., Puniyani, A., Huberman, B.: Search in power-law networks. Phys. Rev. E 64, 46135–46143 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Agarwal, D., Berket, K.: Supporting dynamic ad hoc collaboration capabilities. In: Proc. Conf. for Computing in High-Energy and Nuclear Physics (CHEP) (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aksoy, D., Franklin, M.F., Zdonik, S.B.: Data staging for on-demand broadcast. In: Proc. Conference on Very Large Databases (VLDB) (2001)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Balakrishnan, H., Shenker, S., Walfish, M.: Peering Peer-to-Peer Providers. In: Castro, M., van Renesse, R. (eds.) IPTPS 2005. LNCS, vol. 3640, pp. 104–114. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Banavar, G., Chandra, T., Mukherjee, B., Nagarajarao, J., Strom, R.E., Sturman, D.C.: An efficient multicast protocol for content-based publish-subscribe systems. In: Proc. IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (1999)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bennett, J.C.R., Zhang, H.: Hierarchical packet fair queueing algorithms. In: Proc. SIGCOMM (1996)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bhagwan, R., Savage, S., Voelker, G.: Understanding availability. In: Proc. of the 2nd Int’l Workshop on Peer to Peer Systems (IPTPS) (2003)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Blake, S., Black, D., Carlson, M., Davies, E., Wang, Z., Weiss, W.: Rfc 2475 - an architecture for differentiated services (1998),
  9. 9.
    Bolosky, W.J., Fitzgerald, R.P., Douceur, J.R.: Distributed schedule management in the tiger video fileserver. In: Proc. SOSP (1997)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Braden, R., Clark, D., Shenker, S.: Rfc 1633 - integrated services in the internet architecture: an overview (1994),
  11. 11.
    Carzaniga, A., Wolf, A.L.: Forwarding in a content-based network. In: Proc. SIGCOMM (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Chawathe, Y., Ratnasamy, S., Breslau, L., Lanham, N., Shenker, S.: Making Gnutella-like P2P systems scalable. In: Proc. SIGCOMM (2003)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cherniack, M., Balakrishnan, H., Balazinska, M., Carney, D., Cetintemel, U., Xing, Y., Zdonik, S.: Scalable distributed stream processing. In: Proc. of the First Biennial Conference on Innovative Data Systems Research (CIDR) (2003)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chu, Y., Rao, S.G., Zhang, H.: A case for end system multicast. In: Proc. SIGMETRICS (2000)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Das, A., Gehrke, J., Riedewald, M.: Approximate join processing over data streams. In: Proc. SIGMOD (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Demers, A., Keshav, S., Shenker, S.: Analysis and simulation of a fair queueing algorithm. In: Proc. SIGCOMM (1989)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Goyal, P., Vin, H.M., Cheng, H.: Start-time fair queuing: A scheduling algorithm for integrated services packet switching networks. In: Proc. SIGCOMM (1996)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Grace, P., Coulson, G., Blair, G.S., Porter, B.: Deep middleware for the divergent grid. In: Alonso, G. (ed.) Middleware 2005. LNCS, vol. 3790, pp. 334–353. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Iannaccone, G., May, M., Diot, C.: Aggregate traffic performance with active queue management and drop from tail. Computer Communication Review 31(3), 4–13 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jones, M.B., Dunagan, J.: Engineering realities of building a working peer-to-peer system. Microsoft Research Technical Report MSR-TR-2004-54 (2004), available at:
  21. 21.
    Kalogeraki, V., Gunopulos, D., Zeinalipour-Yazti, D.: A local search mechanism for peer-to-peer networks. In: Proc. CIKM (2002)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Keromytis, A., Misra, V., Rubenstein, D.: SOS: Secure overlay services. In: Proc. SIGCOMM (August 2002)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Loo, B.T., Condie, T., Hellerstein, J., Maniatis, P., Roscoe, T., Stoica, I.: Implementing declarative overlays. In: Proc. SOSP (2005)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Lv, Q., Cao, P., Cohen, E., Li, K., Shenker, S.: Search and replication in unstructured peer-to-peer networks. In: Proc. of ACM Int’l Conf. on Supercomputing (ICS 2002) (June 2002)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lv, Q., Ratnasamy, S., Shenker, S.: Can heterogeneity make gnutella scalable? In: Druschel, P., Kaashoek, M.F., Rowstron, A. (eds.) IPTPS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2429, p. 94. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Olston, C., Loo, B.T., Widom, J.: Adaptive precision setting for cached approximate values. In: Proc. SIGMOD (2001)Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Pietzuch, P., Ledlie, J., Shneidman, J., Welsh, M., Seltzer, M., Roussopoulos, M.: Network-aware operator placement for stream-processing systems. In: Proc. Int’l Conf. on Data Engineering (ICDE) (2006)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Ratnasamy, S., Francis, P., Handley, M., Karp, R., Shenker, S.: A scalable content-addressable network. In: Proc. SIGCOMM (August 2001)Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Reynolds, P., Vahdat, A.: Efficient peer-to-peer keyword searching. In: Endler, M., Schmidt, D.C. (eds.) Middleware 2003. LNCS, vol. 2672. Springer, Heidelberg (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Rodriguez, A., Killian, C., Bhat, S., Kostic, D., Vahdat, A.: MACEDON: Methodology for automatically creating, evaluating, and designing overlay networks. In: Proc. NSDI (2004)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    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, p. 329. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Srivastava, U., Munagala, K., Widom, J.: Operator placement for in-network stream query processing. In: Proc. ACM Symp. on Principles of Database Systems (PODS) (2005)Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Stoica, I., Morris, R., Karger, D., Kaashoek, M.F., Balakrishnan, H.: Chord: A scalable peer-to-peer lookup service for internet applications. In: Proc. SIGCOMM (August 2001)Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Stoica, I., Shenker, S., Zhang, H.: Core-stateless fair queueing: A scalable architecture to approximate fair bandwidth allocations in high speed networks. In: Proc. SIGCOMM (1998)Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Yang, B., Garcia-Molina, H.: Efficient search in peer-to-peer networks. In: ICDCS (2002)Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Yang, B., Garcia-Molina, H.: Designing a super-peer network. In: Proc. ICDE (2003)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© IFIP International Federation for Information Processing 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Brian F. Cooper
    • 1
  1. 1.College of ComputingGeorgia Institute of TechnologyUSA

Personalised recommendations