1 / 13

P4P : Provider Portal for (P2P) Applications

P4P : Provider Portal for (P2P) Applications. Laird Popkin Pando Networks, Inc. Haiyong Xie Laboratory of Networked Systems Yale University. P2P : Bandwidth Usage. Traffic: Internet Protocol Breakdown 1993 - 2006. File-Types: Major P2P Networks - 2006.

malik-harper
Download Presentation

P4P : Provider Portal for (P2P) Applications

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. P4P : Provider Portal for (P2P) Applications Laird Popkin Pando Networks, Inc Haiyong Xie Laboratory of Networked Systems Yale University

  2. P2P : Bandwidth Usage Traffic: Internet Protocol Breakdown 1993 - 2006 File-Types: Major P2P Networks - 2006 • Up to 50-70% of Internet traffic is contributed by P2P applications Cache logic research: Internet protocol breakdown 1993 – 2006; Velocix: File-types on major P2P networks.

  3. A Fundamental Problem • Network-oblivious P2P applications may not be network efficient • 50%-90% of existing local pieces in active users are downloaded externally • Average P2P bit traverses 1000 miles / 5.5 metro hops in Verizon network • Traditional Internet architectural feedback to applications is limited: • routing (hidden) • rate control through coarse-grained TCP congestion feedback • Emerging applications such as P2P can have tremendous flexibility in shaping how data is communicated • more information and feedback are needed to most effectively utilize this flexibility, and for improving network efficiency

  4. P4P Mission • Design a framework to enable better providers and applications cooperation • ISP perspective: guide applications to achieve more efficient network usage • P2P perspective: better user experiences • P4P: provider portal for (P2P) applications • a provider can be • a traditional ISP (e.g., AT&T, Verizon) or • a content distribution provider (e.g., Akamai), or • a caching provider (e.g., PeerApp)

  5. The P4P Framework: Control Plane • iTracker: a portal for each network resource provider (iPortal) • An iTracker provides multiple interfaces • Static topology / policy • Provider capability • Virtual cost • … • iTracker of a provider can be identified in multiple ways • e.g., through DNS SRV records; whois • iTracker can be run by trusted third parties • iTracker access protected by access control

  6. 70 PID1 PID2 20 30 10 PID6 PID3 10 15 60 PID5 PID4 Virtual Cost Interface: Network’ Internal View • PIDs: set of nodes each called a PID • E: set of links connecting PIDs • pe: the “virtual price” of link e • Usage of “virtual price” • vPrice can be used to rank peers, converted to peering weights • vPrice reflects both network status and policy, e.g., • OSPF weights • higher prices on links with highest util. or higher than a threshold • congestion volume (Briscoe)

  7. Virtual Cost Interface: Applications’ View PID1 PID2 70 10 30 20 60 PID6 PID3 PID5 PID4 • ISP computes the cost from one PID to another • link cost and routing • PID-pair costs are perturbed to increase privacy Applications query costs of related PID pairs, adjust traffic patterns to place less loadon more “expensive” pairs

  8. Interdomain: Application External View • Application obtains cost for top (ASN, PID) pairs Intradomain cost + interdomain cost From AS 1’s point view (AS1, PID1) (AS2, PID2) Intradomain cost + interdomain cost From AS 2’s point view

  9. Example: P4P Protocol for BT pTracker iTracker 2 3 4 1 peer ISP A • Information flow: 1. peer queries pTracker 2/3. pTracker asks iTracker for virtual cost (occasionally) 4. pTracker selects and returns a set of active peers, according to both the virtual prices and its own P2P objective

  10. Complete Set: Feb 21 to April 2008 FTTH 209% faster

  11. Current P4P-WG: 70+ Members ISPs, P2Ps, Researchers. Scope includes business processes, protocols, education, etc.

  12. Discussions I: Possible modifications to/uses of IETF protocols Trackerless p2p use a mechanism to locate iTrackers (e.g. DNS) Tracker-based p2p A mechanism for clients to find their (ASN, PID) (i.e. easier than IP mapping) A lookup mechanism for finding the iTracker for a given ASN. Enable P2P to "play nice" with ISPs A mechanism for determining the ISPs usage policies, and the user's usage against quota. Imagine using a cell phone without being able to tell how many minutes you've used. A standard mechanism for marking "bulk data" (i.e. not time sensitive).

  13. Discussions II: P4P Data Plane ISP A ISP B b a Routers mark packets to provide faster, fine-grained feedbacks, e.g., virtual capacity to optimize multihoming cost and performance - applications adjust traffic rates according to feedbacks • Applications mark importance of traffic

More Related