Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

P2P Supernodes

3,047 views

Published on

Some work looking at the theoretical implications of the use of supernodes in peer-to-peer networks.

Published in: Technology
  • Be the first to comment

P2P Supernodes

  1. 1. Necessity of Supernodes David Hadaller, Kevin Regan and Tyrel Russell
  2. 2. P2P Networks Internet application Application Layer Overlay Networks 2
  3. 3. Problems of P2P Networks Scalability Security Anonimity Fault Tolerant 3
  4. 4. P2P Structured Unstructured Networks Centralized Napster ??? Decentralized Chord/Tapestry Gnutella/Kazaa 4
  5. 5. The centralized and unstructured decentralized systems are not scalable in their vanilla form Structured decentralized networks are scalable But require the topology to be of a certain structure 5
  6. 6. Alternatives... The addition of supernodes seems to make unstructured decentralized networks scalable Why? 6
  7. 7. Three Directions Traditional Decentralized Unstructured (Flooding) P2P Networks Graph Theoretical Bounds Decentralized Structured P2P Networks 7
  8. 8. What is a Peer-to- Peer System? Most commonly used for file sharing Napster released 1999, shutdown 2001 Gnutella released 2000 Kazaa released 2001 Today: millions of users sharing petabytes of data
  9. 9. System Interaction User issues a keyword search Network returns list of peers contain matching files
  10. 10. Architecture A peer operates as both a client and a server Idea: Everyone is equal, everyone cooperates (both not true) File sharing: -FastTrack (Kazaa, Kazaa Lite) -Gnutella (Morpheus, LimeWire)
  11. 11. How do Unstructured Peer- to-Peer Systems Work?
  12. 12. Scalability Issues Gnutella not scalable
  13. 13. Making Gnutella Scalable Chawathe et al. obtained 3 to 5x improvement in system capacity Adding nodes of higher degree Kazaa
  14. 14. Host Characteristics 6% users very well connected 10% of sessions >5 hrs
  15. 15. Impact of File Sharing Study at the University of Washington P2P accounts for 43% Internet traffic Web accounts for 14%
  16. 16. Graph Theory Formulate the problem as a Graph Theory Problem Let the P2P network be a graph G where G is a set of vertices V and there exists an edge between two nodes u,v∈V when u is a neighbour of v in the overlay network 16
  17. 17. Some Definitions Maximum Degree We denote ∆ as the maximum over the degree of all vertices of a graph. Minimum (u,v)-path We denote the minimum path between two vertices u, v, u ≠ v, as d(u, v). Diameter We define diameter D as the length of the max d(u, v) for all u, v ∈ V 17
  18. 18. Moore Bound Upper bound on number of vertices in a graph with max degree Δ and diameter D D n ≤ 1 + ∆ 1 + (∆ − 1) + · · · + (∆ − 1) ∆(∆ − 1)D − 2 ≤ = n0 (D, ∆) ∆−2 n(∆−2)+2 log ∆ D≥ log(∆ − 1) 18
  19. 19. Moore Bound d(u,v) = D v d(u,v) = 2 v v d(u,v) = 1 v v !-1 v v !-1 v u ! v v n ≤ 1 + ∆ 1 + (∆ − 1) + · · · + (∆ − 1)D 19
  20. 20. Special Graphs Moore Graph Have equivilence in the Moore bound Diameter of 2: Moore graphs only exist with Δ = 3, 7, 57 Diameter more than 3: No Moore graphs exist de Bruijn Graph 8 4 Leland-Solomon Graph 6 3 9 2 7 1 5 0 20
  21. 21. Random Graphs We are interested in property Q, so for a graph of size n Enumerate the number of possible graphs with Q If proportion of graphs with Q → 1 as n → ∞ Then we say that almost every graph has property Q 21
  22. 22. Random Graphs Some properties: almost every graph has diameter 2 is k-connected for a fixed k > 2 has no complete subgraph Hk where k > 2log2n 22
  23. 23. Random Graphs For a fixed Δ ≥ 3 almost every Δ-regular graph has diameter 6∆ D ≥ log∆−1 n + log∆−1 logn − log∆−1 +1 ∆−2 23
  24. 24. Graph Theory Summary There is a theorectical limit to search in a P2P network As logn increases the time to search will increase by roughly O(logn) 24
  25. 25. Distributed Hash Tables Distributed Hash Tables (DHTs) are an implementation of a decentralized, structured peer-to-peer network The diameter of the network scales logarithmically with the size of the network Node degree varies from O(1) to O(log n) 25
  26. 26. Implementations Tapestry - Plaxton Mesh CAN - d-dimensional Torus Pastry - Logical Ring Chord - Logical Ring with Chords Koorde - Logical Ring with deBruijn Graphs HyperCuP - Hypercube 26
  27. 27. Number of Name Degree Diameter Nodes Tapestry N O(log N) O(log N) CAN N O(d) O(n1/d) Pastry N O(log N) O(log N) Chord N O(log N) O(log N) Koorde N O(1) O(log N) HyperCuP N O((b-1)l) O(log N)
  28. 28. Conclusion Graph theory gives us a way to bound almost any random graph with a given number of nodes and a maximum degree Flooding P2P networks have looked at scalability from an empirical perspective Distributed Hash Tables provide a scalable method for P2P at the cost of 28
  29. 29. Questions? 29

×