1 / 17

Study of the Relationship between Peer-to-Peer Systems and IP Multicasting

Study of the Relationship between Peer-to-Peer Systems and IP Multicasting. T. Oh-ishi, K. Sakai, K. Kikuma, and A. Kurokawa NTT Network Service Systems Laboratories, NTT Corporation IEEE Communications Magazine , vol41(1), Jan. 2003 Presented by Ho Tsz Kin 28/01/2004. Agenda. Introduction

akiva
Download Presentation

Study of the Relationship between Peer-to-Peer Systems and IP Multicasting

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Study of the Relationship between Peer-to-Peer Systems and IP Multicasting T. Oh-ishi, K. Sakai, K. Kikuma, and A. Kurokawa NTT Network Service Systems Laboratories, NTT Corporation IEEE Communications Magazine, vol41(1), Jan. 2003 Presented by Ho Tsz Kin 28/01/2004

  2. Agenda • Introduction • Features of P2P Systems • IP Multicasting over P2P Systems • Routing Protocol • Evaluation • Conclusion

  3. Introduction • Peer-to-peer (P2P) systems • Involve a number of directly connected “peers” exchanging various types of information among themselves • Problems of P2P systems • Not specific application • Generate a lot of network traffic • Require the resources of every peer (e.g. CPU, memory, and bandwidth)

  4. Introduction • IP multicasting • Is mainly for live streaming services • Can solve problems of P2P systems • Applying IP multicasting to P2P systems • Is it applicable? • Is it worth? • What is the suitable routing protocol? • What happen when part of the network does not support IP multicasting?

  5. Features of P2P Systems • Current P2P systems • Send broadcast packets or a series of identical unicast packets to peers • Two types • Hybrid P2P • Pure P2P • Two phases

  6. Features of P2P systems • Discovery phase • Heavier traffic in Pure P2P system • Delivery phase • No differences between Pure and Hybrid P2P systems • All peers must have the same messages. When new messages arrive, they should be passed on to all the other peers

  7. Features of P2P systems • P2P systems essentially require a broadcast mechanism • use a series of unicast or broadcast packets • Continuous unicast packets • Need substantial CPU power and bandwidth of peers and all of the network resources • Broadcast packets • wasting various resources • Security problem • IP multicasting • Solution for broadcast mechanism in P2P systems

  8. IP multicasting over P2P Systems • Almost all P2P application produce heavy traffic • Reduction of such traffic using IP multicasting seems to be effective

  9. IP multicasting over P2P Systems • Comparison between live streaming and P2P systems

  10. Routing Protocol • PIM • The protocols compose multicast trees using routing tables made by an arbitrary unicast routing protocol • Protocol Independent Multicast-Sparse Mode (PIM-SM) • Peers send IGMP join message to rendezvous point (RP) • The multicast tree is originatingfrom the RP • When a peer sends multicastcontent, the packets is encapsulated by the closest edge router, and sent to RP

  11. Routing Protocol • PIM-Source Specific Multicast (PIM-SSM) • Source-specific protocol • The contents receiver can specify the addresses of desired sources in the IGMP join message • When the closest edge router receives an IGMP join, it configures the shortest path between the receiver and the sender

  12. Sequence for joining groups • PIM-SM • One IGMP join/leave to RP • PIM-SSM • Joining • Send IGMP join to all senders • Get all other peers to send it an IGMP join • Leaving • Send IGMP leave to all senders

  13. Comparison of PIM-SM and PIM-SSM • Conclude that PIM-SM is better for P2P systems

  14. Evaluation • Simulation Model • Members exchange information across two ISPs • ISP-A does not support IP multicasting • ISP-B support IP multicasting • Only one router in each ISP • All peers belong to a virtual group

  15. Evaluation • Simulation #1 • Peers of ISP-A use unicast to all other peers • Peers of ISP-B use unicast to peers of ISP-A and multicast to peers of ISP-B • Simulation #2 • Peers of ISP-A use unicast to peers of ISP-A, and send multicast packets to ISP-B’s RPs • Peers of ISP-B use unicast to peers of ISP-A and multicast to peers of ISP-B

  16. Conclusion • Analyze features of P2P systems • Suitable routing protocol is discussed • IP multicasting is the solution for heavy traffic generated in P2P systems • Future Works • Sequence for joining/leaving groups • Effect of RP’s location on traffic characteristics • Multicast address allocation and traffic control methods for the entire network

  17. Discussion • Combining Peer-to-Peer and IP Multicasting • The simulation details are not mentioned, e.g. traffic characteristics, duration, application • Benefits of using IP multicasting over P2P systems

More Related