Rationality and Self-Interest in Peer to Peer Networks

Much of the existing work in peer to peer networking assumes that users will follow prescribed protocols without deviation. This assumption ignores the user’s ability to modify the behavior of an algorithm for self-interested reasons. We advocate a different model in which peer to peer users are expected to be rational and self-interested. This model is found in the emergent fields of Algorithmic Mechanism Design (AMD) and Distributed Algorithmic Mechanism Design (DAMD), both of which introduce game-theoretic ideas into a computational system. We, as designers, must create systems (peer to peer search, routing, distributed auctions, resource allocation, etc.) that allow nodes to behave rationally while still achieving good overall system outcomes. This paper has three goals. The first is to convince the reader that rationality is a real issue in peer to peer networks. The second is to introduce mechanism design as a tool that can be used when designing networks with rational nodes. The third is to describe three open problems that are relevant in the peer to peer setting but are unsolved in existing AMD/DAMD work. In particular, we consider problems that arise when a networking infrastructure contains rational agents.

[1]  Seif Haridi,et al.  Distributed Algorithms , 1992, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[2]  T. Sandholm Limitations of the Vickrey Auction in Computational Multiagent Systems , 1996 .

[3]  J. Doug Tygar,et al.  Electronic Auctions with Private Bids , 1998, USENIX Workshop on Electronic Commerce.

[4]  Noam Nisan,et al.  Algorithmic mechanism design (extended abstract) , 1999, STOC '99.

[5]  Moshe Tennenholtz,et al.  Distributed Games: From Mechanisms to Protocols , 1999, AAAI/IAAI.

[6]  Eytan Adar,et al.  Free Riding on Gnutella , 2000, First Monday.

[7]  David C. Parkes,et al.  Iterative combinatorial auctions: achieving economic and computational efficiency , 2001 .

[8]  Gerhard Weiß,et al.  Antisocial Agents and Vickrey Auctions , 2001, ATAL.

[9]  Sean W. Smith,et al.  SAM: a flexible and secure auction architecture using trusted hardware , 2001, Proceedings 15th International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium. IPDPS 2001.

[10]  David Abramson,et al.  Economic models for management of resources in peer-to-peer and grid computing , 2001, SPIE ITCom.

[11]  Stamatis Vassiliadis,et al.  A peer-to-peer agent auction , 2002, AAMAS '02.

[12]  Felix Brandt,et al.  A verifiable, bidder-resolved Auction Protocol , 2002 .

[13]  Joan Feigenbaum,et al.  Distributed algorithmic mechanism design: recent results and future directions , 2002, DIALM '02.

[14]  Madhav V. Marathe,et al.  Proceedings of the 6th international workshop on Discrete algorithms and methods for mobile computing and communications , 2002 .

[15]  A BGP-based mechanism for lowest-cost routing , 2002, PODC '02.

[16]  David C. Parkes,et al.  Using redundancy to improve robustness of distributed mechanism implementations , 2003, EC '03.

[17]  Joan Feigenbaum,et al.  A BGP-based mechanism for lowest-cost routing , 2002, PODC '02.