Evolution of superpeer topologies An analytical perspective
Pages 339 - 358
Abstract
In superpeer based networks, resourceful peers (having high bandwidth and computational resources) are discovered through the process of bootstrapping, whereby they get upgraded to superpeers. However, bootstrapping is influenced by several factors like limitation on the maximum number of connections a peer can have due to bandwidth constraints, limitation on the availability of information of existing peers due to cache size constraints and also by the attachment policy of the newly arriving peers to the resourceful peers. In this paper, we derive closed form equations that model the effect of these factors on superpeer related topological properties of the networks. Based on the model, we show that existing bootstrapping protocols can lead to a situation where only a small fraction of the resourceful peers gets converted to superpeers, i.e., a large fraction of them remain underutilized; we later validate this statement using real Gnutella snapshots. We observe that as a node attachment policy, newly arriving peers must use a combination of random and preferential attachment strategy so as to ensure proper utilization of the resourceful peers. We also show that the cache parameters must also be suitably tuned so as to increase the fraction of superpeers in the network. Finally, we show that in real Gnutella networks the degree distribution generated using our models suitably fits the corresponding empirical values.
References
[1]
S. Buchegger, D. Schiberg, L.-H. Vu, A. Datta, PeerSoN: p2p social networking: Early experiences and insights, in: SNS09, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 2009, pp. 46-52.
[2]
H. Shen, Z. Li, K. Chen, Social-p2p: An online social network based p2p file sharing system, IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst., 26 (2015) 2874-2889.
[3]
F.A. Silva, A. Boukerche, T.R.M.B. Silva, L.B. Ruiz, E. Cerqueira, A.A.F. Loureiro, Vehicular networks: A new challenge for content-delivery-based applications, ACM Comput. Surv., 49 (2016) 11:1-11:29.
[4]
A.T. Liem, I.S. Hwang, A. Nikoukar, C.Z. Yang, M.S. Ab-Rahman, C.H. Lu, P2P live-streaming application-aware architecture for QoS enhancement in the EPON, IEEE Syst. J., PP (2016) 1-11.
[5]
H. Guclu, M. Yuksel, Scale-free overlay topologies with hard cutoffs for unstructured peer-to-peer networks, in: Proceedings of 27th IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, ICDCS, 2007, pp. 32.
[6]
E. Bulut, B.K. Szymanski, Constructing limited scale-free topologies over peer-to-peer networks, IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst., 25 (2014) 919-928.
[7]
P. Kirk, Gnutella - a protocol for a revolution, 2003. http://rfc-gnutella.sourceforge.net/.
[8]
G. Jesi, A. Montresor, O. Babaoglu, Proximity-Aware superpeer overlay topologies, IEEE Trans. Netw. Serv. Manag., 4 (2007) 74-83.
[9]
B. Yang, H. Garcia-Molina, Designing a super-peer network, in: ICDE03, 2003, pp. 49-60.
[10]
N.-M. Balouchzahi, M. Fathy, A. Akbari, An efficient infrastructure based service discovery in vehicular networks using P2P structures, J. Supercomput., 72 (2016) 1013-1034.
[11]
A. Qureshi, D. Megias, H. Rifa-Pous, PSUM: Peer-to-peer multimedia content distribution using collusion-resistant fingerprinting, J. Netw. Comput. Appl., 66 (2016) 180-197.
[12]
J. Chandra, B. Mitra, N. Ganguly, Effect of constraints on superpeer topologies, in: INFOCOM13, 2013, pp. 60-64.
[13]
H. Fushing, C. Chen, S.-Y. Liu, P. Koehl, Bootstrapping on undirected binary networks via statistical mechanics, J. Stat. Phys., 156 (2014) 823-842.
[14]
H. Papadakis, P. Fragopoulou, E. Markatos, M. Roussopoulos, ITA: Innocuous topology awareness for unstructured P2P networks, IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst., 24 (2013) 1589-1601.
[15]
C. GauthierDickey, C. Grothoff, Bootstrapping of peer-to-peer networks, in: IEEE Proceedings of DAS-P2P, LNCS, Springer, Berlin, 2008.
[16]
P. Karbhari, M. Ammar, A. Dhamdhere, H. Raj, G. Riley, E. Zegura, Bootstrapping in Gnutella: A measurement study, in: PAM04, April, 2004.
[17]
G. Pandurangan, P. Raghavan, E. Upfal, Building low-diameter p2p networks, in: FOCS01, 2001, pp. 492-499.
[18]
M. Srivatsa, B. Gedik, L. Liu, Large scaling unstructured peer-to-peer networks with heterogeneity-aware topology and routing, IEEE Trans. Parallel Distrib. Syst., 17 (2006) 1277-1293.
[19]
M. Conrad, H.-J. Hof, A generic, self-organizing, and distributed bootstrap service for peer-to-peer networks, in: IWSOS07, 2007, pp. 59-72.
[20]
M. Jelasity, A. Montresor, O. Babaoglu, T-Man: Gossip-based fast overlay topology construction, Comput. Netw., 53 (2009) 2321-2339.
[21]
R.H. Wouhaybi, A.T. Campbell, Phenix: Supporting resilient low-diameter peer-to-peer topologies, in: INFOCOM04, vol. 1, 2004, pp. 119.
[22]
Y.J. Pyun, D.S. Reeves, Constructing a balanced,(log (n)/1oglog (n))-diameter super-peer topology for scalable p2p systems, in: P2P04, 2004, pp. 210-218.
[23]
T. Moscibroda, S. Schmid, R. Wattenhofer, On the Topologies Formed by Selfish Peers, in: IPTPS06, 2006.
[24]
K.-W. Kwong, D.H.K. Tsang, Building heterogeneous peer-to-peer networks: Protocol and analysis, IEEE/ACM Trans. Netw., 16 (2008) 281-292.
[25]
J.H. Paik, D.H. Lee, Scalable signaling protocol for web real-time communication based on a distributed hash table, Comput. Commun., 70 (2015) 28-39.
[26]
M. Medo, G. Cimini, S. Gualdi, Temporal effects in the growth of networks, Phys. Rev. Lett., 107 (2011) 238701.
[27]
G. Bianconi, Emergence of weight-topology correlations in complex scale-free networks, Europhys. Lett., 71 (2005) 1029-1035.
[28]
A. Barabsi, R. Albert, Emergence of scaling in random networks, Science, 286 (1999) 509-512.
[29]
P.L. Krapivsky, S. Redner, Organization of growing random networks, Phys. Rev. E, 63 (2001) 066123-106612314.
[30]
G. Bianconi, A.L. Barabasi, Competition and multiscaling in evolving networks, Europhys. Lett., 54 (2001) 436-442.
[31]
S.N. Dorogovtsev, J.F.F. Mendes, Evolution of networks with aging of sites, Phys. Rev. E, 62 (2000) 1842-1845.
[32]
M.D. Knig, C.J. Tessone, Network evolution based on centrality, Phys. Rev. E, 84 (2011).
[33]
H. Li, H. Zhao, W. Cai, J.-Q. Xu, J. Ai, A modular attachment mechanism for software network evolution, Physica A, 392 (2013) 2025-2037.
[34]
K. Lewis, M. Gonzalez, J. Kaufman, Social selection and peer influence in an online social network, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 109 (2012) 68-72.
[35]
L.V. Chewning, B. Montemurro, The structure of support: Mapping network evolution in an online support group, Comput. Hum. Behav., 64 (2016) 355-365.
[36]
M. Fire, C. Guestrin, Analyzing complex network user arrival patterns and their effect on network topologies, CoRR (2016). http://arxiv.org/abs/1603.07445
[37]
X. Lu, E. Bulut, B. Szymanski, Towards limited scale-free topology with dynamic peer participation, Comput. Netw., 106 (2016) 109-121.
[38]
F. Radicchi, Underestimating extreme events in power-law behavior due to machine-dependent cutoffs, 2014. ArXiv e-prints, arXiv:1405.0058.
[39]
C. Fu, X. Wang, Network growth under the constraint of synchronization stability, Phys. Rev. E, 83 (2011).
[40]
A. Bharambe, C. Herley, V. Padmanabhan, Analyzing and improving a bittorrent networks performance mechanisms, in: INFOCOM06, 2006, pp. 1-12.
[41]
L. Guo, S. Chen, Z. Xiao, E. Tan, X. Ding, X. Zhang, Measurements, analysis, and modeling of bittorrent-like systems, in: IMC 05, USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA, 2005.
[42]
S. Ghosh, G. Korlam, N. Ganguly, The effects of restrictions on number of connections in osns: A case-study on twitter, in: WOSN10, USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA, 2010.
[43]
S. Ghosh, A. Srivastava, N. Ganguly, Assessing the effects of a soft cut-off in the twitter social network, in: NETWORKING11, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011, pp. 288-300.
[44]
B. Mitra, F. Peruani, S. Ghose, N. Ganguly, Analyzing the vulnerability of superpeer networks against attack, in: CCS07, 2007.
[45]
M. Ripeanu, Peer-to-peer architecture case study: Gnutella network, in: P2P01, 2001, pp. 99-100.
[46]
B. Mitra, A.K. Dubey, S. Ghose, N. Ganguly, How do superpeer networks emerge?, in: INFOCOM10, 2010, pp. 1514-1522.
[47]
J. Chandra, Topology and its Effects on the Performance of Peer-to-Peer Networks, Indian Institute of Technology, Kharagpur, India, 2012.
[48]
C. GauthierDickey, C. Grothoff, Bootstrapping of peer-to-peer networks, in: Proceedings of IEEE/IPSJ 12th International Symposium on Applications and the Internet, 2008, pp. 205-208.
[49]
M. Knoll, A. Wacker, G. Schiele, T. Weis, Bootstrapping in peer-to-peer systems, in: ICPADS08, 2008, pp. 271-278.
[50]
D. Ilie, D. Erman, A. Popescu, A.A. Nilsson, Measurement and analysis of gnutella signaling, in: IPSI04, 2004.
[51]
R. Albert, A. Barabsi, Topology of evolving networks: Local events and universality, Phys. Rev. Lett., 85 (2000) 5234.
[52]
H. Kwak, C. Lee, H. Park, S. Moon, What is twitter, a social network or a news media? - www10, 2010. http://an.kaist.ac.kr/traces/www2010.html.
[53]
MPI-SWS, Social computing/online social networks research @ MPI-SWS, 2014. http://socialnetworks.mpi-sws.org/.
[54]
B. Viswanath, A. Mislove, M. Cha, K.P. Gummadi, On the evolution of user interaction in facebook, in: WOSN09, 2009.
- Evolution of superpeer topologies An analytical perspective
Recommendations
Formal understanding of the emergence of superpeer networks: a complex network approach
ICDCN'10: Proceedings of the 11th international conference on Distributed computing and networkingIn this paper, we develop a formal framework which explains the emergence of superpeer networks on execution of the bootstrapping protocols by incoming nodes. Bootstrapping protocols exploit physical properties of the online peers like resource content, ...
How do superpeer networks emerge?
INFOCOM'10: Proceedings of the 29th conference on Information communicationsIn this paper, we develop an analytical framework which explains the emergence of superpeer networks on execution of the commercial peer-to-peer bootstrapping protocols by incoming nodes. Bootstrapping protocols exploit physical properties of the online ...
Proximity-Aware Superpeer Overlay Topologies
The concept of superpeer has been introduced to improve the performance of popular P2P applications. A superpeer is a "powerful" node that acts as a server for a set of clients, and as an equal with respect to other superpeers. By exploiting ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
Copyright © Elsevier B.V.
Publisher
Elsevier Science Publishers B. V.
Netherlands
Publication History
Published: 01 September 2017
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 0Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)0
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 01 Jan 2025