Scalable supernode selection in peer-to-peer overlay networks

We define a problem called the supernode selection problem which has emerged across a variety of peer-to-peer applications. Supernode selection involves selection of a subset of the peers to serve a special role. The supernodes must be well-dispersed throughout the peer-to-peer overlay network, and must fulfil additional requirements such as load balance, resource needs, adaptability to churn, and heterogeneity. While similar to dominating set and p-centers problems, the supernode selection problem must meet the additional challenge of operating within a huge, unknown and dynamically changing network. We describe three generic super-node selection protocols we have developed for peer-to-peer environments: a label-based scheme for structured overlay networks, a distributed protocol for coordinate-based overlay networks, and a negotiation protocol for unstructured overlays. We believe an integrated approach to the supernode selection problem can benefit the peer-to-peer community through cross-fertilization of ideas and sharing of protocols.

[1]  Magnus Karlsson,et al.  Turning heterogeneity into an advantage in overlay routing , 2003, IEEE INFOCOM 2003. Twenty-second Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (IEEE Cat. No.03CH37428).

[2]  M. Frans Kaashoek,et al.  Vivaldi: a decentralized network coordinate system , 2004, SIGCOMM 2004.

[3]  Mark Handley,et al.  Topologically-aware overlay construction and server selection , 2002, Proceedings.Twenty-First Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies.

[4]  Satish Kumar,et al.  Next century challenges: scalable coordination in sensor networks , 1999, MobiCom.

[5]  George F. Riley,et al.  NETI@home: A Distributed Approach to Collecting End-to-End Network Performance Measurements , 2004, PAM.

[6]  Ivan Stojmenovic,et al.  On calculating power-aware connected dominating sets for efficient routing in ad hoc wireless networks , 2002, J. Commun. Networks.

[7]  Pitu B. Mirchandani,et al.  Location on networks : theory and algorithms , 1979 .

[8]  Vern Paxson.  End-to-end routing behavior in the internet , 2006, Comput. Commun. Rev..

[9]  Peng-Jun Wan,et al.  Distributed Construction of Connected Dominating Set in Wireless Ad Hoc Networks , 2004, Mob. Networks Appl..

[10]  Nancy A. Lynch,et al.  Distributed Algorithms , 1992, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[11]  Peter J. Slater,et al.  Fundamentals of domination in graphs , 1998, Pure and applied mathematics.

[12]  Antony I. T. Rowstron,et al.  Pastry: Scalable, Decentralized Object Location, and Routing for Large-Scale Peer-to-Peer Systems , 2001, Middleware.

[13]  Hui Zhang,et al.  Predicting Internet network distance with coordinates-based approaches , 2002, Proceedings.Twenty-First Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies.

[14]  Mark Handley,et al.  A scalable content-addressable network , 2001, SIGCOMM 2001.

[15]  Robert Morris,et al.  Chord: A scalable peer-to-peer lookup service for internet applications , 2001, SIGCOMM 2001.

[16]  Paul Francis,et al.  An architecture for a global Internet host distance estimation service , 1999, IEEE INFOCOM '99. Conference on Computer Communications. Proceedings. Eighteenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies. The Future is Now (Cat. No.99CH36320).

[17]  Daniel Zappala,et al.  Cluster Computing on the Fly : P 2 P Scheduling of Idle Cycles in the Internet , 2004 .

[18]  Suresh Jagannathan,et al.  Enhancing locality in structured peer-to-peer networks , 2004, Proceedings. Tenth International Conference on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 2004. ICPADS 2004..

[19]  Vaduvur Bharghavan,et al.  Routing in ad-hoc networks using minimum connected dominating sets , 1997, Proceedings of ICC'97 - International Conference on Communications.