Recovering internet symmetry in distributed computing

This paper describes two systems to recover the Internet connectivity impaired by private networks and firewalls. These devices cause asymmetry in the Internet, making peer-to-peer computing difficult or even impossible. The Condor system is one of those that are severely impaired by the asymmetry. Compared to normal peer-to-peer computing applications, Condor has stricter requirements, which are representative to any grid computing. To make Condor seamlessly work across private networks and over firewalls, we designed and implemented Dynamic Port Forwarding (DPF) and Generic Connection Brokering (GCB). Both DPF and GCB satisfy the representative requirements. Furthermore DPF supports dedicated large clusters very well because it is simple, efficient, and highly scalable. On the other hand, GCB perfectly supports non-dedicated or personal clusters because it is independent to private network or firewall technologies and does not require airy administrative power to deploy it. In this paper, we describe the implementations of DPF and GCB and analyze them with respect to performance, deployability, security, and scalability.

[1]  Miron Livny,et al.  A worldwide flock of Condors: Load sharing among workstation clusters , 1996, Future Gener. Comput. Syst..

[2]  Ian T. Foster,et al.  The Anatomy of the Grid: Enabling Scalable Virtual Organizations , 2001, Int. J. High Perform. Comput. Appl..

[3]  Michael S. Borella,et al.  Realm Specific IP: Framework , 2001, RFC.

[4]  Miron Livny,et al.  Condor-a hunter of idle workstations , 1988, [1988] Proceedings. The 8th International Conference on Distributed.

[5]  Ralph E. Droms,et al.  Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol , 1993, RFC.

[6]  Ian Foster,et al.  The Grid 2 - Blueprint for a New Computing Infrastructure, Second Edition , 1998, The Grid 2, 2nd Edition.

[7]  Michael S. Borella,et al.  Realm Specific IP: Protocol Specification , 2001, RFC.

[8]  J. Frankel,et al.  The gnutella protocol specification v0.4 document revision 1.2 , 2000 .

[9]  Paul Francis,et al.  IPNL: A NAT-extended internet architecture , 2001, SIGCOMM 2001.

[10]  Stephen T. Kent,et al.  Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol , 1998, RFC.

[11]  Matt Ganis,et al.  SOCKS Protocol Version 5 , 1996, RFC.

[12]  Hugo Krawczyk,et al.  A Security Architecture for the Internet Protocol , 1999, IBM Syst. J..

[13]  Michael S. Borella,et al.  RSIP: Address Sharing with End-to-End Security , 2000, USENIX Special Workshop on Intelligence at the Network Edge.

[14]  Paul Francis,et al.  The IP Network Address Translator (NAT) , 1994, RFC.

[15]  David R. Cheriton,et al.  An Architecture for Content Routing Support in the Internet , 2001, USITS.

[16]  Rajesh Raman,et al.  High-throughput resource management , 1998 .

[17]  Ion Stoica,et al.  A Waypoint Service Approach to Connect Heterogeneous Internet Address Spaces , 2001, USENIX Annual Technical Conference, General Track.

[18]  Ami Marowka,et al.  The GRID: Blueprint for a New Computing Infrastructure , 2000, Parallel Distributed Comput. Pract..

[19]  Michael S. Borella,et al.  RSIP Support for End-to-end IPsec , 2001, RFC.