A case for end system multicast (keynote address)

The conventional wisdom has been that IP is the natural protocol layer for implementing multicast related functionality. However, ten years after its initial proposal, IP Multicast is still plagued with concerns pertaining to scalability, network management, deployment and support for higher layer functionality such as error, flow and congestion control. In this paper, we explore an alternative architecture for small and sparse groups, where end systems implement all multicast related functionality including membership management and packet replication. We call such a scheme End System Multicast. This shifting of multicast support from routers to end systems has the potential to address most problems associated with IP Multicast. However, the key concern is the performance penalty associated with such a model. In particular, End System Multicast introduces duplicate packets on physical links and incurs larger end-to-end delay than IP Multicast. In this paper, we study this question in the context of the Narada protocol. In Narada, end systems self-organize into an overlay structure using a fully distributed protocol. In addition, Narada attempts to optimize the efficiency of the overlay based on end-to-end measurements. We present details of Narada and evaluate it using both simulation and Internet experiments. Preliminary results are encouraging. In most simulations and Internet experiments, the delay and bandwidth penalty are low. We believe the potential benefits of repartitioning multicast functionality between end systems and routers significantly outweigh the performance penalty incurred.

[1]  Srinivasan Seshan,et al.  A case for end system multicast , 2002, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun..

[2]  Bobby Bhattacharjee,et al.  A Protocol for Scalable Application Layer Multicast , 2001 .

[3]  Stephen E. Deering,et al.  Multicast routing in internetworks and extended LANs , 1988, SIGCOMM '88.

[4]  Ben Y. Zhao,et al.  Bayeux: an architecture for scalable and fault-tolerant wide-area data dissemination , 2001, NOSSDAV '01.

[5]  Jon Crowcroft,et al.  Bandwidth-delay based routing algorithms , 1995, Proceedings of GLOBECOM '95.

[6]  Jörg Liebeherr,et al.  Application-layer multicast with Delaunay triangulations , 2001, GLOBECOM'01. IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference (Cat. No.01CH37270).

[7]  Srinivasan Seshan,et al.  Enabling conferencing applications on the internet using an overlay muilticast architecture , 2001, SIGCOMM '01.

[8]  Yakov Rekhter,et al.  A Border Gateway Protocol 4 (BGP-4) , 1994, RFC.

[9]  Mark Handley,et al.  Equation-based congestion control for unicast applications , 2000, SIGCOMM.

[10]  Michalis Faloutsos,et al.  On power-law relationships of the Internet topology , 1999, SIGCOMM '99.

[11]  Dinesh C. Verma,et al.  ALMI: An Application Level Multicast Infrastructure , 2001, USITS.

[12]  Jörg Liebeherr,et al.  A scalable control topology for multicast communications , 1998, Proceedings. IEEE INFOCOM '98, the Conference on Computer Communications. Seventeenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies. Gateway to the 21st Century (Cat. No.98.

[13]  Eric Brewer,et al.  Scattercast: an architecture for internet broadcast distribution as an infrastructure service , 2000 .

[14]  Ion Stoica,et al.  REUNITE: a recursive unicast approach to multicast , 2000, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2000. Conference on Computer Communications. Nineteenth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies (Cat. No.00CH37064).

[15]  FaloutsosMichalis,et al.  On power-law relationships of the Internet topology , 1999 .

[16]  David R. Cheriton,et al.  IP multicast channels: EXPRESS support for large-scale single-source applications , 1999, SIGCOMM '99.

[17]  Christophe Diot,et al.  Simple mu lticast: A design for sim-ple, low-overhead multicast , 1999 .

[18]  Stephen E. Deering,et al.  Multicast routing in internetworks and extended LANs , 1988, CCRV.

[19]  Anthony McAuley,et al.  AMRoute: Adhoc Multicast Routing Protocol , 1999 .

[20]  Kirk L. Johnson,et al.  Overcast: reliable multicasting with on overlay network , 2000, OSDI.

[21]  Van Jacobson,et al.  Adaptive web caching: towards a new global caching architecture , 1998, Comput. Networks.

[22]  Hui Zhang,et al.  A third-party value-added network service approach to reliable multicast , 1999, SIGMETRICS '99.

[23]  Fred B. Schneider,et al.  Byzantine generals in action: implementing fail-stop processors , 1984, TOCS.

[24]  Ellen W. Zegura,et al.  How to model an internetwork , 1996, Proceedings of IEEE INFOCOM '96. Conference on Computer Communications.

[25]  Stephen E. Deering,et al.  First IETF internet audiocast , 1992, CCRV.

[26]  Mark Handley,et al.  Application-Level Multicast Using Content-Addressable Networks , 2001, Networked Group Communication.

[27]  Sugih Jamin,et al.  End-Host Multicast Communication Using Switch-Trees Protocols , 2002, 2nd IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid (CCGRID'02).

[28]  Guy Kortsarz,et al.  Generating low-degree 2-spanners , 1994, SODA '94.

[29]  Jerome H. Saltzer,et al.  End-to-end arguments in system design , 1984, TOCS.

[30]  Stefan Savage,et al.  The end-to-end effects of Internet path selection , 1999, SIGCOMM '99.

[31]  Hui Zhang,et al.  Resilient multicast support for continuous-media applications , 1997, Proceedings of 7th International Workshop on Network and Operating System Support for Digital Audio and Video (NOSSDAV '97).

[32]  J. J. Garcia-Luna-Aceves,et al.  The case for reliable concurrent multicasting using shared ACK trees , 1997, MULTIMEDIA '96.