P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey Class Seminar Distributed Systems Rofideh Hadighi and Mehdi Cheshomi University of Science and Technology Mazandaran, Babol Email: {rhadighi, mcheshomi}@ustmb.ac.ir Advisor: Hadi Salimi Email: hsalimi@iust.ac.ir 8 July 2010 Agenda Motivation P2P Traffic Generator Sources Prerequisites For Traffic Controlling Traffic Identification Mechanisms P2P Traffic Identification P2P Traffic Control P2P Traffic Control Taxonomy Conclusion and Open Issues P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey 2 of 23 Motivation Wide Range of Applications (Specially on Content Distribution) • • • • File Sharing: Torrent, Kaza, Freenet, … Streaming: PPStream, TvAnts, … Collaborating: Chat, Online Game, … Cloud Computing: P2P storage P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey 3 of 23 Motivation(Cont.) Millions Users Over the World • 40%-90% of Internet Traffic!? • The Estimations Differ Very Much, Why? IT penetration, Culture, Politics, …. Limited Scope • 40% is not even ignorable Makes Problems For ISPs • Cost • Effect on Other Network Services P2P Traffic Must Be Controlled P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey 4 of 23 P2P Traffic Generator Sources Signaling Information • Indexing, Routing and … Content Exchanging • Small to Large Files • Video and Audio Stream Content Exchanging >> P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey Signaling Information 5 of 23 Prerequisites For Traffic Controlling Policy Identification Measurement Control Fig 1. Prerequisites of the Traffic Control P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey 6 of 23 Traffic Identification Mechanisms Signature-Based • Port-Based: • Web: Port 80 • Kaza: Port 1214 • Payload-Based: • Web : “GET” Statement • Bit Torrent: “0X13Bit” Statement Heuristic-Based • Depended on Experience • Constant Bit Rate P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey Traffic of Stream 7 of 23 Traffic Identification Mechanisms(Cont.) Signature-Based • Pros: • Accuracy(Low False Positive) • Practicable • Cons: • • • • • Processing and Storage Overhead Unable to Inspect Encrypted Payload Unable to Indentify New Protocols Application Dependent Privacy Limitations P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey 8 of 23 Traffic Identification Mechanisms(Cont.) Heuristic-Based • Pros: • • • • Low Storage Overhead Application In Dependent Capable to Indentify New Protocol Flexible • Cons: • High False Positive • Unrefined • Complex Algorithm(Sometime) P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey 9 of 23 P2P Traffic Identification Signature-Based • Port Based • Payload based Non Payload Based • T. Karagiannis and et al • Heuristics: (Src,Dst) IP Pairs that use TCP and UDP together (IP,Port) Connection Graph P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey 10 of 23 P2P Traffic Identification(Cont.) • F. Constantinou and et al • Heuristic • Network Diameter Network Diameter=5 Fig 2. A P2P Network Schematics P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey 11 of 23 P2P Traffic Control Other Control • Rate Limitation • Port Based • Localization • Caching P2P Caching is More Complex Than Web Caching X. Xiao-long et al, Global Evaluation Values Based • Abstraction of IP and Port • Peer Address, Peer group, … • Network Policy P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey 12 of 23 P2P Traffic Control(Cont.) Self Control • Rate Limitation • Peer Coordination Protocol • Localization • Local Peer Selection • Super Peer • P4P(Provider Portal For P2P) P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey 13 of 23 P2P Traffic Control(Cont.) Table 1. Overview of P2P Traffic Control Taxonomy and Mapping of It on Some Real Methods and Systems Self Control Other Control Rate Limitation Localization PCP Local Peer Selection, Super Peer, P4P Port based, PRX Filter P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey Global Evaluation Values based Caching 14 of 23 P2P Traffic Control(Cont.) Other Control • Pros: • No Need to Change P2P Protocols • Cons: • Need to Identify Traffic • Unrefined Self Control • Pros: • More Effective Than Other Control Mechanisms • Cons: • Need to Change Protocols • Underlay Awareness P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey 15 of 23 P2P Traffic Control(Cont.) Port-Based: • Pros: • Simple • Cons: • Inflexible • Deficient to new P2P Protocol Generations Caching • Pros: • No Limitation • Cons: • Copy Right Law • Difficult to Deploy P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey 16 of 23 P2P Traffic Control(Cont.) Super-Peer: • Pros: • Reduce Traffic very much • Cons: • Effect on Robustness • A Super Peer Per P2P Network P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey 17 of 23 Open Issues and Offers Standardization Make Two P2P Networks to Work Together Multi Protocol Super Peer Peer Awareness • Network Catalog Use Artificial Intelligence Bandwidth Usage Prediction Use Signaling Information for Traffic Indentifying P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey 18 of 23 Conclusion P2P Traffic is a Critical Challenge of Internet It will be More Critical in Future By P2P Streaming P2P Identification and Control Mechanisms are Unrefined Many Challenges of P2P Traffic Control are Open. P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey 19 of 23 Bibliography 1. H. Schulze and K.Mochalski, “Internet Study 2008/2009”, 2009, Available at: http://www.ipoque.com/resources/internet-studies/internet-study-2008_2009 [Last Visit 1 July 2010] 2. S.Saroiu, P.K.Gummadi, R.Dunn, S.D.Gribble, and H.M.Levy. “An analysis of Internet content delivery systems”, In OSDI’02, December 2002. 3. J. Wolfgang, "Characterization and Classification of Internet Backbone Traffic", PhD Thesis, Department of Computer Science and Engineering, Chalmers University of Technology, 2010. 4. The Cooperative Association for Internet Data Analysis, 2009,Available at: http://www.caida.org/research/traffic-analysis/classification-overview/ [Last Vist 25 June 2010] 5. S. Sen and J. Wang, "Analyzing peer-to-peer traffic across large networks", IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (TON),Vol:12, No:2, p:219-232, April 2004 6. A.Callado, C.Kamienski, G.Szabó, B.P.Gero, J.Kelner, S.Fernandes and D.Sadok, "A Survey on Internet Traffic Identification", IEEE Communications Surveys and Tutorials.Vol 11, No 3, pp: 3752, 2009. 7. T. Karagiannis, A.Broido, M.Faloutsos and K.Claffy, "Transport Layer Identification of P2P Traffic", Proceedings of the 4th ACM SIGCOMM Conference on Internet Measurement (IMC 2004), pp. 121-134, Italy, October 2004. 8. F. Constantinou and P.Mavrommatis, "Identifying Known and Unknown Peer-to-Peer Traffic", Proceedings of the 5th IEEE International Symposium on Network Computing and Applications, pp.93-102, Cambridge, MA, USA, July 24-26, 2006. P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey 20 of 23 Bibliography(Cont.) 9. Y. Mingjiang, W. Jianping, and K. Xu, “Caching the P2P Traffic in ISP Network”, IEEE International Conference on Communications, pp: 5876 – 5880, 2008. 10. A. Wierzbicki, N. Leibowitz, M. Ripeanu and R. Wozniak, "Cache Replacement Policies Revisited: The Case of P2P Traffic", Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid, p: 182-189, April 19-22, 2004. 11. X. Xiao-long and W. Ru-chuan, "P2P Network Traffic Control Mechanism Based on Global Evaluation Values",The Journal of China Universities of Posts and Telecommunications,Vol 16, No 3, pp: 66-70, June 2009. 12. M. Piatek, H.V. Madhyastha, J.P.John, A.Krishnamurthy and T.Anderson, "Pitfalls for ISP-Friendly P2P Design", Proceedings of the HotNets, 2009. 13. H. Xie,Y.R. Yang and A.Silberschatz, "Towards an ISP-Compliant, Peer-Friendly Design for Peerto-Peer Networks", In Proceedings of Networking, Lecture Notes in Computer Science Volume 0302, Singapore, May, 2008. 14. H. Xie,Y.R. Yang, A. Krishnamurthy,Y.G.Liu and A.Silberschatz, "P4P: Provider Portal for Applications", Proceedings of the ACM SIGCOMM 2008 conference on Data communication, August 17-22, Seattle, WA, USA, 2008. 15. R. Bindal, P.Cao,W.Chan, J.Medved, G.Suwala, T.Bates and A.Zhang, "Improving Traffic Locality in BitTorrent Via Biased Neighbor Selection", Proceedings of the Int’l Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS), 2006. P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey 21 of 23 Bibliography(Cont.) 16. D. Choffnes and F. Bustamante, "Taming the Torrent: A Practical Approach to Reducing Cross-ISP Traffic in Peer-to-Peer Systems", Proceedings of ACM SIGCOMM, 2008. 17. Zh. Shen and R.Zimmermann. "ISP-friendly peer selection in P2P networks", Proceedings of the 17th ACM international conference on Multimedia, Beijing, China, October 19-24, 2009. 18. O.Y. Rong and C.Hui. "A Novel Peer Selection Algorithm to Reduce BitTorrent-like P2P Traffic between Networks (ITCS)", International Conference on Information Technology and Computer Science,Vol. 2, pp.397-401, 2009. 19. Y. Liu, L. Guo, F. Li and S. Chen, "A Case Study of Traffic Locality in Internet P2P Live Streaming Systems (ICDCS)", 29th IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, pp: 423-432, 2009. 20. Y. Huang,Y. F. Chen, R. Jana, B. Wei, M. Rabinovich, and Z. Xiao, “Challenges of P2P streaming technologies for IPTV services”, Proceeding of IPTV Workshop, International World Wide Web Conference, May 2006. 21. Y. Zhao and Y. An, "A Destination-Oriented Multicast Trees Optimization Algorithm for Controlling P2P Traffic," International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Computational Intelligence (AICI),Vol 1, pp: 353-357, 2009. 22. Ipoque GmbH,2009, Availabale at: http://www.ipoque.com/userfiles/file/datasheetprotocollist.pdf [Last Visit 1 July 2010] P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey 22 of 23 P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey Questions ? P2P Traffic Control From A to B: A Survey 23 of 23