skip to main content
10.1145/2413176.2413194acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesconextConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Tradeoffs in CDN designs for throughput oriented traffic

Authors Info & Claims
Published:10 December 2012Publication History

ABSTRACT

Internet delivery infrastructures are traditionally optimized for low-latency traffic, such as the Web traffic. However, in recent years we are witnessing a massive growth of throughput-oriented applications, such as video streaming. These applications introduce new tradeoffs and design choices for content delivery networks (CDNs). In this paper, we focus on understanding two key design choices: (1) What is the impact of the number of CDN's peering points and server locations on its aggregate throughput and operating costs? (2) How much can ISP-CDNs benefit from using path selection to maximize its aggregate throughput compared to other CDNs who only have control at the edge? Answering these questions is challenging because content distribution involves a complex ecosystem consisting of many parties (clients, CDNs, ISPs) and depends on various settings which differ across places and over time. We introduce a simple model to illustrate and quantify the essential tradeoffs in CDN designs. Using extensive analysis over a variety of network topologies (with varying numbers of CDN peering points and server locations), operating cost models, and client video streaming traces, we observe that: (1) Doubling the number of peering points roughly doubles the aggregate throughput over a wide range of values and network topologies. In contrast, optimal path selection improves the CDN aggregate throughput by less than 70\%, and in many cases by as little as a few percents. (2) Keeping the number of peering points constant, but reducing the number of location (data centers) at which the CDN is deployed can significantly reduce operating costs.

References

  1. Sandvine, "Global {I}nternet phenomena report." Technical report, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. G. Maier, A. Feldmann, V. Paxson, and M. Allman, "On dominant characteristics of residential broadband Internet traffic," in IMC, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  3. http://youtube-global.blogspot.com/2010/05/at-five-years-two-billion-views-per-day.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  4. E. Schonfeld, "Cisco: By 2013 video will be 90 percent of all consumer ip traffic and 64 percent of mobile." http://tinyurl.com/nw8jxg, 2009.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. D. Wischik, C. Raiciu, A. Greenhalgh, and M. Handley, "Design, implementation and evaluation of congestion control for multipath {TCP}," in NSDI, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. D. Xu, M. Chiang, and J. Rexford, "PEFT: Link-state routing with hop-by-hop forwarding can achieve optimal traffic engineering," in IEEE INFOCOM, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. W. Xu and J. Rexford, "MIRO: Multi-path interdomain routing," in SIGCOMM, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. M. Motiwala, M. Elmore, N. Feamster, and S. Vempala, "Path splicing," in SIGCOMM, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. "Routescience." http://support.avaya.com/css/Products/P0345.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. "Cisco optimized edge routing (oer)." http://www.cisco.com/en/US/products/ps6628/products_ios_protocol_option_home.html, 2010.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. P. Gill, M. Arlitt, Z. Li, and A. Mahanti, "The flattening internet topology: Natural evolution, unsightly barnacles or contrived collapse?," in PAM, 2008. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  12. "The internet topology data kit, caida." http://www.caida.org/data/active/internet-topology-data-kit}.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. Y.-J. Chi, R. Oliveira, and L. Zhang, "Cyclops: The internet as-level observatory.," in CCR, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. A. J. Su, D. R. Choffnes, A. Kuzmanovic, and F. E. Bustamante, "Drafting behind Akamai travelocity-based detouring," in SIGCOMM, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. www.conviva.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. "Private conversations with akamai operators.."Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. F. Dobrian, V. Sekar, A. Awan, I. Stoica, D. Joseph, A. Ganjam, J. Zhan, and H. Zhang, "Understanding the impact of video quality on user engagement," in SIGCOMM, 2011. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. "Adobe. http dynamic streaming." http://www.adobe.com/products/httpdynamicstreaming.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. http://techblog.netflix.com/2011/01/netflix-performance-on-top-isp-networks.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  20. E. Nygren, R. K. Sitaraman, and J. Sun, "The Akamai network: A platform for high-performance internet applications," in ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  21. D. Clark, W. Lehr, and S. Bauer, "Interconnection in the internet: The policy challenge," Research Conference on Communication, Information and Internet Policy, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. http://drpeering.net/AskDrPeering/blog/articles/Peering_vs_Transit___The_Business_Case_for_Peering.html}.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. http://www.akamai.com/dl/investors/10k_2010_1.pdf.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  24. T. Leighton and S. Rao, "Multicommodity max-flow min-cut theorems and their use in designing approximation algorithms," in Journal of the ACM, 1999. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. M. Caesar, M. Casado, T. Koponen, J. Rexford, and S. Shenker, "Dynamic route computation considered harmful," in CCR, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  26. http://www.fixedorbit.com/stats.htm.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. www.cs.bu.edu/brite.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. H. V. Madhyastha, T. Isdal, M. Piatek, C. Dixon, T. Anderson, A. Krishnamurthy, and A. Venkataramani, "iPlane: An information plane for distributed services," in OSDI, 2006. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. "Private conversation with iplane group."Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  30. L. Qiu, Y. R. Yang, Y. Zhang, and S. Shenker, "On selfish routing in internet-like environments," in SIGCOMM, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  31. L. Li, D. Alderson, W. Willinger, and J. Doyle, "A first-principles approach to understanding the internet's router-level topology," in 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. T. Hirayama, S. Arakawa, S. Hosoki, and M. Murata, "Models of link capacity distribution in isp's router-level topology," in International Journal of Computer Networks and Communications (IJCNC), 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. www.quova.com.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. L. Gao and J. Rexford, "Stable internet routing without global coordination," in TON, 2001. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. P. B. Godfrey, I. Ganichev, S. Shenker, and I. Stoica, "Pathlet routing," in SIGCOMM, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  36. http://aws.amazon.com/ec2/#pricing.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. D. K. Goldenberg, L. Qiu, H. Xie, Y. R. Yang, and Y. Zhang, "Optimizing cost and performance for multihoming," in SIGCOMM, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  38. R. Krishnan, H. V. Madhyastha, S. Srinivasan, S. Jain, A. Krishnamurthy, T. Anderson, and J. Gao, "Moving beyond end-to-end path information to optimize CDN performance," in IMC, 2009. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  39. V. K. Adhikari, S. Jain, and Z.-L. Zhang, "YouTube traffic dynamics and its interplay with a tier-1 ISP: An ISP perspective,'' in IMC, 2010. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  40. C. Huang, Y. A. Wang, J. Li, and K. W. Ross, "Measuring and evaluating large-scale CDNs," in Microsoft Research Technical Report MSR-TR-2008--106, 2008.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Y. A. Wang, C. Huang, J. Li, and K. W. Ross, "Estimating the performance of hypothetical cloud service deployments: A measurement-based approach," in IEEE INFOCOM}, 2011.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  42. www.speedtest.net.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  43. "Akamai and limelight say testing methods not accurate in microsoft research paper." http://blog.streamingmedia.com/the_business_of_online_vi/2008/10/akamai-responds.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. A. Akella, B. Maggs, S. Seshan, A. Shaikh, and R. Sitaraman, "A measurement-based analysis of multihoming," in SIGCOMM, 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  45. A. Akella, J. Pang, B. Maggs, S. Seshan, and A. Shaikh, "A comparison of overlay routing and multihoming route control," in SIGCOMM, 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library

Index Terms

  1. Tradeoffs in CDN designs for throughput oriented traffic

        Recommendations

        Comments

        Login options

        Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

        Sign in
        • Published in

          cover image ACM Conferences
          CoNEXT '12: Proceedings of the 8th international conference on Emerging networking experiments and technologies
          December 2012
          384 pages
          ISBN:9781450317757
          DOI:10.1145/2413176

          Copyright © 2012 ACM

          Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

          Publisher

          Association for Computing Machinery

          New York, NY, United States

          Publication History

          • Published: 10 December 2012

          Permissions

          Request permissions about this article.

          Request Permissions

          Check for updates

          Qualifiers

          • research-article

          Acceptance Rates

          Overall Acceptance Rate198of789submissions,25%

        PDF Format

        View or Download as a PDF file.

        PDF

        eReader

        View online with eReader.

        eReader