Skip to main content
Log in

SUPNET: An end-to-end solution to scalable unstructured P2P networking

  • Published:
Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Despite many improvements on original unstructured P2P networks, these systems still suffer from several problems, the most important of which are, (a) lack of guarantees on the integrity of the network topology in the face of churns, (b) excessive traffic cost and (c) poor quality of search results. This paper introduces an end-to-end scalable unstructured P2P networking solution called SUPNET to address many of these issues. SUPNET is based on our pragmatic, design oriented approach to engineering complex networks. Rather than modeling dynamical behavior in already-existing networks, we actively design and implement local stochastic dynamics so that an engineered global system, with predictable structures emerges. The resulting protocol, SUPNET, consists of two sub-protocols for network management and content search. The network management sub-protocol is scalable and highly robust and is capable of utilizing the heterogeneous distribution of network resources. Its high stability is the result of implementation of a novel distributed feedback mechanism. The search sub-protocol is capable of locating every item, even if a single copy of that item exists in the network, while producing a traffic that scales provably sub-linear with the network size. It also contains mechanisms for very efficient location of popular items as well as distributed parameter tuning algorithms. These, along with inherently self-organized and de-centralized operation, relative ease of implementation and solid analytical foundation, make SUPNET a compelling solution for unstructured P2P networking.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. www.Azureus.com.

  2. www.emule-project.org.

References

  1. Sarshar N, Roychowdhury V (2004) Scale-free and stable structures in complex ad-hoc networks. Phys Rev E 69, 026101

    Google Scholar 

  2. Sarshar N, Roychowdhury VP (2005) Multiple power-law structures in heterogeneous complex networks. Phys Rev E 72, 026114

    Google Scholar 

  3. Lovsz L, Winkler P (1993) Mixing of random walks and other diffusions on a graph. Surveys in combinatorics, London mathematical society lecture, Note Series 187. Cambridge University Press

  4. Sarshar N, Oscar Boykin P, Roychowdhury VP (2004) Percolation search in power law networks: making unstructured peer-to-peer networks scalable, IEEE P2P ’04

  5. Sarshar N, Boykin PO, Roychowdhury VP (2006) Finite percolation at a multiple of threshold. Preprint: http://arxiv.org/abs/cond-mat/0601211

  6. Yang Y, Dunlap R, Rexroad M, Cooper BF (2006) Performance of full text search in structured and unstructured peer-to-peer systems. IEEE INFOCOM’06

  7. Muller W, Oscar Boykin P, Sarshar N, Roychowdhury VP (2008) Comparison of image similarity queries in P2P systems source. Comput Commun 31(2):375–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Lv Q, Cao P, Cohen E, Li K, Shenker S (2002) Search and replication in unstructured peer-to-peer networks, ICS ’02

  9. Vazquez A (2000) Knowing a network by walking on it: emergence of scaling. arXiv:cond-mat/0006132

  10. Doval D, O’Mahony D (2003) Overlay networks: a scalable alternative for P2P. IEEE Internet Computing 7(4):79–82

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Loo BT, Huebsch R, Stoica I, Hellerstein JM (2004) The case for a hybrid P2P search infrastructure, IPTPS’ 04

  12. Ferreira RA, Ramanathan MK, Grama A, Jagannathan S (2005) Randomized protocols for duplicate elimination in peer-to-peer storage systems. In: Proceedings of the 5th IEEE international conference on peer-to-peer computing (P2P 2005). Konstanz, Germany, August, pp 201–208

  13. Ganesh AJ, Kermarrec A-M, Massoulie L (2003) Peer-to-peer membership management for gossip-based protocols. IEEE Trans Comput 52(2):139–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Wouhaybi RH, Campbell AT (2004) Phenix: supporting resilient low-diameter peer-to-peer topologies. In Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM

  15. Melamed R, Keidar I (2004) Araneola: a scalable reliable multicast system for dynamic environments, NCA

  16. Sum J, Lau SC (2004) A novel connection algorithm for P2P network. PDPTA

  17. Gkantsidis C, Mihail M, Saberi A (2004) Random walks in peer-to-peer networks. In Proc. Infocom, Mar

  18. Adamic LA, Lukose RM, Puniyani AR, Huberman BA (2001) Search in power-law networks. In Physical Review E 64:46135

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kong JS, Bridgewater JSA, Roychowdhury VP (2006) A general framework for scalability and performance analysis of DHT routing systems. DSN 343–354

  20. Chawathe Y, Ratnasamy S, Breslau L, Lanham N, Shenker S (2003) Making Gnutella-like P2P systems scalable. Proc. ACM SIGCOMM

  21. Liang J (2004) Understanding KaZaA. http://cis.poly.edu/ross/papers/UnderstandingKaZaA.pdf

  22. Kong JS, Bridgewater JSA, Roychowdhury VP (2006) A general framework for scalability and performance analysis of DHT routing systems. DNS’06

  23. Maymounkov P, Mazieres D (2002) Kademlia: a peer-to-peer information system based on the XOR Metric. IPTPS’02

  24. Molloy M, Reed B (1995) A critical point for random graphs on a fixed degree sequence. Random Struct Algorithms 6:161–180

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. Molloy M, Reed B (1998) The size of the giant component of a random graph with a given degree sequence. Comb Probab Comput 7:295–305

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nima Sarshar.

Appendix

Appendix

Theoretical preliminaries

  1. (1)

    Mixing Times of Random Networks: Random walk on any connected graph eventually mixes, i.e., the probability that the random walker is found at a node with degree k will converge to ck for some constat c independent of k, as the length of the walk goes to infinity. This, of course, is the well known linear preferential attachment. If the random walk of TSA mixes, it will return a node with degree k is linearly proportional to k for large L.

    The length of the walk required for mixing can be as high as O(N 3), where N is the number of nodes (see e.g., [3] for a review of classic results). Recently, it has been shown that for many randomly generated networks, the value of L for the random walk to mix is only O(logN) [17]. Therefore, initiating connections by sampling nodes through a short random walk of length L = O(logN) closely approximates linear preferential attachment. Random-walk as a means for approximating preferential attachment has been employed in other works before (see e.g. [9]). We have resorted to extensive simulations to verify that the mixing time for SUPNET-T networks is indeed O(logN), even though there is no mathematical proof at this time.

  2. (2)

    Percolation Threshold of Random Power-Law Networks: Percolation threshold of a network is defined as the critical threshold for which percolation with a smaller probability results in a network with no giant connected component. The percolation probability of random networks on a given degree distribution can be shown to be [24, 25]:

    $$\label{eqn:pc} p_c=\frac{\langle k \rangle}{\langle k^2 - \langle k \rangle\rangle} $$
    (6)

    where \({\langle k \rangle}\) and \({\langle k^2 \rangle}\) are the average and variance of the degree distribution. For a random power-law network with exponent τ, this evaluates to:

    $$ p_c= \frac{\sum_{k=1}^{k_{max}} k\cdot k^{-\tau}}{\sum_{k=1}^{k_{max}} k^2\cdot k^{-\tau}-\sum_{k=1}^{k_{max}} k\cdot k^{-\tau}} $$

    where k max is the maximum degree. For large k max and 2 < τ < 3, the average degree is a constant, while the variance diverges. As such, p c can be approximated as, \( p_c\approx A k_{max}^{\tau-3} \) for some constant A. The cut-off value of k max is ~N1/τ (at which point the expected number of nodes with degree k max becomes in the order of 1). Plugging this into p c we get, \( p_c \sim N^{-\frac{3-\tau}{\tau}} \) for 2 < τ < 3.

  3. (3)

    Scaling Properties of PSA: The following theorem about the search traffic of PSA has been proved in [4]:

    Theorem 1 For τ = 2, PSA with high probability (w.h.p.) can find any content (even if there is a single copy of the content in the network) within latency of only O(logN) requiring an average cache size of only O(logN). For τ = 2, the percolation probability should be chosen as κlog(N)N − 1/2, for some proper constant κ in the order of one and a walk length of L = O(logN). Thus, the number of messages per query is only O(logNN1/2). For 2 < τ < 3, on the other hand, the search time is still O(logN), while the average cache size is O(N1 − 2/τ), producing a traffic per query of only O(N2 − 3/τ). The percolation probability should be chosen as κN1 − 3/τ, for some proper κ′ > 0 in the order of one and a walk length of L = O(N1 − 2/τ).

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sarshar, N., Roychowdhury, V.P. SUPNET: An end-to-end solution to scalable unstructured P2P networking. Peer-to-Peer Netw. Appl. 1, 122–138 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-008-0010-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12083-008-0010-x

Keywords

Navigation