Non-Metric Coordinates for Predicting Network Proximity

We consider the problem of determining the "closest", or best Internet host to connect to, from a list of candidate servers. Most existing approaches rely on the use of metric, or more specifically Euclidean coordinates to infer network proximity. This is problematic, given that network distances such as latency are known to violate the triangle inequality. This leads us to consider non-metric coordinate systems. We perform an empirical comparison between the "min-plus" non-metric coordinates and two metric coordinates, namely L-infinity and Euclidean. We observe that, when sufficiently many dimensions are used, min-plus outperforms metric coordinates for predicting Internet latencies. We also consider the prediction of "widest path capacity" between nodes. In this framework, we propose a generalization of min-plus coordinates. These results apply when node coordinates consist in measured network proximity to a random subset of landmark nodes. We perform empirical validation of these results on widest path bandwidth between PlanetLab nodes. We conclude that appropriate non-metric coordinates such as generalized min-plus systems are better suited than metric systems for representing the underlying structure of Internet distances, measured either via latencies or bandwidth.

[1]  Robert Tappan Morris,et al.  Vivaldi: a decentralized network coordinate system , 2004, SIGCOMM '04.

[2]  Yuval Shavitt,et al.  Big-bang simulation for embedding network distances in Euclidean space , 2004, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[3]  D. Saha,et al.  On Suitability of Euclidean Embedding for Host-Based Network Coordinate Systems , 2010, IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking.

[4]  Eng Keong Lua,et al.  Internet Routing Policies and Round-Trip-Times , 2005, PAM.

[5]  M. Fréchet Les dimensions d'un ensemble abstrait , 1910 .

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

[7]  P. Groenen,et al.  Modern multidimensional scaling , 1996 .

[8]  Jon Crowcroft,et al.  On the accuracy of embeddings for internet coordinate systems , 2005, IMC '05.

[9]  Jon M. Kleinberg,et al.  Metric embeddings with relaxed guarantees , 2005, 46th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science (FOCS'05).

[10]  Jon M. Kleinberg,et al.  Triangulation and embedding using small sets of beacons , 2004, 45th Annual IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science.

[11]  Miguel Castro,et al.  PIC: practical Internet coordinates for distance estimation , 2004, 24th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, 2004. Proceedings..

[12]  Peter Steenkiste,et al.  Estimating Available Bandwidth Using Packet Pair Probing , 2002 .

[13]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  King: estimating latency between arbitrary internet end hosts , 2002, IMW '02.

[14]  João L. Sobrinho,et al.  Algebra and algorithms for QoS path computation and hop-by-hop routing in the Internet , 2001, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2001. Conference on Computer Communications. Twentieth Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Society (Cat. No.01CH37213).

[15]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  King: estimating latency between arbitrary internet end hosts , 2002, IMW '02.

[16]  Emin Gün Sirer,et al.  Meridian: a lightweight network location service without virtual coordinates , 2005, SIGCOMM '05.

[17]  William H. Press,et al.  Numerical Recipes in FORTRAN - The Art of Scientific Computing, 2nd Edition , 1987 .

[18]  T. C. Hu,et al.  Multi-Terminal Network Flows , 1961 .

[19]  Zhi-Li Zhang,et al.  On suitability of Euclidean embedding of internet hosts , 2006, SIGMETRICS '06/Performance '06.

[20]  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.

[21]  William H. Press,et al.  The Art of Scientific Computing Second Edition , 1998 .