Economic Traffic Management: Mechanisms and Applications

The paradigm shift from centralized services into hundreds of thousands of decentralized services changes traffic directions and patterns in the Internet. In that light, overlay providers form logical communication topologies, which effect the underlying telcos' as well as Internet Service Providers' (ISP) traffic and network management. Thus, Economic Traffic Management (ETM) principles deal with incentives, decentralized traffic generation, and modern applications, such as integrated Video-on-Demand and live streaming approaches. Therefore, this work overviews the very recent work on ETM mechanisms, especially driven by the SmoothIT project, and on LiveShift, combining efficiently architectural and system demands for an incentive-driven application management. Furthermore, this section describes in examples, provides evidences, and concludes that ETM and LiveShift can pave an efficient path to modern application support of distributed overlay traffic management, which benefits telcos, ISPs, overlay providers, and end users, if all or parts of them see the right incentives to cooperate, behave well, or interact.

[1]  Maximilian Michel,et al.  Can P2P-Users Benefit from Locality-Awareness? , 2010, 2010 IEEE Tenth International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing (P2P).

[2]  William Chan,et al.  Improving Traffic Locality in BitTorrent via Biased Neighbor Selection , 2006, 26th IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS'06).

[3]  Daniel Tabak.  Risc Systems and Applications , 1996 .

[4]  George D. Stamoulis,et al.  ETMS: A System for Economic Management of Overlay Traffic , 2010, Future Internet Assembly.

[5]  Gerhard Haßlinger.  ISP Platforms Under a Heavy Peer-to-Peer Workload , 2005, Peer-to-Peer Systems and Applications.

[6]  Simon Oechsner,et al.  BGP-Based Locality Promotion for P2P Applications , 2010, 2010 Proceedings of 19th International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks.

[7]  Christian Scheideler,et al.  Can ISPS and P2P users cooperate for improved performance? , 2007, CCRV.

[8]  B. Cohen,et al.  Incentives Build Robustness in Bit-Torrent , 2003 .

[9]  Fabián E. Bustamante,et al.  Taming the torrent: a practical approach to reducing cross-isp traffic in peer-to-peer systems , 2008, SIGCOMM '08.

[10]  David Hausheer,et al.  LiveShift: Mesh-pull live and time-shifted P2P video streaming , 2011, 2011 IEEE 36th Conference on Local Computer Networks.

[11]  Burkhard Stiller,et al.  Towards the Future Internet - Emerging Trends from European Research , 2010, Future Internet Assembly.

[12]  Klaus Wehrle,et al.  Peer-to-Peer Systems and Applications , 2005, Peer-to-Peer Systems and Applications.

[13]  Abraham Silberschatz,et al.  P4p: provider portal for applications , 2008, SIGCOMM '08.

[14]  Johan Pouwelse,et al.  Give-to-Get: free-riding resilient video-on-demand in P2P systems , 2008, Electronic Imaging.

[15]  Konstantin Pussep.  Peer-assisted video-on-demand: cost reduction and performance enhancement for users, overlay providers, and network operators , 2011 .

[16]  David D. Clark,et al.  A knowledge plane for the internet , 2003, SIGCOMM '03.

[17]  George D. Stamoulis,et al.  A Markov model for the evaluation of cache insertion on peer-to-peer performance , 2010, 6th EURO-NGI Conference on Next Generation Internet.

[18]  David Hausheer,et al.  CompactPSH: An efficient transitive TFT incentive scheme for Peer-to-Peer Networks , 2009, 2009 IEEE 34th Conference on Local Computer Networks.

[19]  Donald F. Towsley,et al.  On the interaction between overlay routing and underlay routing , 2005, Proceedings IEEE 24th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies..

[20]  Arun Venkataramani,et al.  Contracts: Practical Contribution Incentives for P2P Live Streaming , 2010, NSDI.