Download Napster/Genulla/Freenet - Department of Computer Science

Peer-to-Peer Computing
CS587x Lecture
Department of Computer Science
Iowa State University
What to Cover
Review on some P2P applications



Napster
Gnutella
Freenet
Discussion and summary
Resource Sharing
Questions to answer in order to design a
resource-sharing network




How
How
How
How
to add new nodes to the network
can one node know about others
can a node find and retrieve data
to manage the shared data
users
Client/Server Architecture
Create a server to store the information that these
nodes want to share


The server is the only data source
Clients request data from server
Example: mp3.com



A client registers to mp3.com and uploads its music files to the
server
The songs are then stored and indexed on a server that is part
of the web site
Other uses can connect to the web site and downloads the
songs they are interested in
Limitation of C/S model




Scalability is hard to achieve
Presents a single point of failure
Requires administration
Unused resource at the network edge
Some P2P Applications
Napster
Gnutella
Freenet
Napster
Each node registers to
napster.com and provides a
list of its song titles


The napster server knows the
music titles and their sites
The songs themselves are still
stored locally
For a node to download a
song,



the node contacts the server
The server returns a list of
nodes that have the song
The requesting node selects
one of the nodes in the list to
download the file directly from
the node
Highlights of Napster
Main innovation: a client downloads a music directly
from another client, i.e., P2P communication

After a client downloads a music, it can serves other clients
Napster server itself does not have any music files

It acts as a directory or broker
Advantages



Each consumer contributes its resource (disk and bandwidth)
and content to the community
Contents are more reliable because the same file is stored in
many nodes, which are geographically distributed
Administration and service cost are minimal
Drawback


Napster is a hybrid P2P system since a central server is required
to coordinate file sharing
The central server presents a single point of failure
Gnutella
Creating a Gnutella network

A node joins the network with a PING to announce
self
 IP address, port, number/size of shared files


Receivers forward the Ping to their neighbors
Receivers back-propagate a PONG to announce self
 Each Pong includes sender’s IP address, number/size of
shared files
Maintaining a Gnutella network


PING neighbors periodically
PING Well-known root nodes if starting from scratch
Search Protocol
For node A to request a file (any kind), it


creates a query (A, S, N, T), where S is search string, N unique
request ID, T Time-to-Live
checks local system, if not found
 Sends (A, S, N, T) to all Gnutella neighbors
B receives a query (A, S, N, T)


If B has already received query N or T = 0, drops the query
Otherwise, B looks up S locally and sends (N, Result) to A if
anything found
 Any kind of look up (could simply grep, or construct some sql cmd)

If not found locally,
 B sends (B, S, N, T-1) to all of its Gnutella neighbors
 B records the fact that A has made the request N
When B receives a response of the form (N, Result)
from one of its neighbors, it forwards the response to A
Gnutella Messages
PING

request the transitive closure of connected nodes to identify them,
essentially asking the question "Are you there?“
PONG

response by a node upon receiving a PING; the responding node
provides its IP address and number of sharable files it contains. This
gives the answer that "Yes, I am here….“
QUERY

request to locate a set of files matching some filter criteria. These
are messages stating, "I am looking for x".
HITS

response to a query giving a list of files matching the filter criteria
and the IP address of the provider, can be many in number.
GET/PUSH

request a file provider to contact the requester. This provides a
simple mechanism to attempt to get through firewalls
Partial Map of a Gnutella Network
Highlights of Gnutella
Pure P2P

Unlike Napster, Fully decentralized, no single point
of failure
Limitations


Scalability: if you send out a request with a TTL of
10, and each site contacts six other sites, up to
61+62+63+64+65 +66+67+68+69+610 messages
could be exchanged
Not anonymous: since result contains the URL
string, the source provider can be tracked – this is
addressed in Freenet
Freenet
Freenet is a pure P2P system mainly designed
to support



distributed information storage and retrieval
anonymity for producers, consumers and holders of
information
adaptive respond to usage patterns
Freenet differentiates from Gnutella mainly in



Retrieving data
Storing data
Managing data
Architecture
Each file is identified by a binary key


The key is generated using some hash function
Every file is stored, retrieved, and maintained with its file
key
Each node maintains a local data store and a
routing table


data store maintains a set of files
routing table keeps information about neighboring nodes
and the keys that they are thought to hold
 A sequence of (file key, node address)
 Used for file retrieval
key
neighbor
30
123.234.456.1
100
888.234.456.2
65
999.234.456.3
Retrieving data
A user first obtains or calculates a key
The user sends a search request message (key+TTL) to
local node
When a node receives a request, it checks its own data
storage


If the specified data is found, returns it
Otherwise, the node looks up its routing table and forwards the
request to the node that has the nearest key
 why do this - the similarity of two keys actually has nothing to do
with that of their corresponding files?
If this request is successful, the node that has the
target data



returns the data through the search path,
caches the file in its own data store, and key
creates a new entry in its routing table
neighbor
30
123.234.456.1
100
888.234.456.2
65
999.234.456.3
Example
1.Cache
Calculate
file binary
in
file key
Cache file in
2.datastore
Check routing table for nodedatastore
with
Create
nearest
newkey
entry in
Create new entry in
routing table
routing table
A
B
FOUND
NOT
NOT
FOUND
FOUND
1. Check datastore for file
2. Try
3.
Check
therouting
node with
table
second
for node
with nearest
nearest
key key to requested one
FAILURE
C
E
D
Cache file in datastore
Create new entry in
routing table
File request (key, hops to live)
Data reply + actual data source
Failure message
Effect of Retrieving Mechanism
Anonymity

Uncontrolled replication allows one to deny
responsibility of having the file
Quality of routing improved over time:


Nodes specialize in locating sets of similar keys
Files with similar keys are stored in clustering
(why?)
 Files are key-clustering instead of subject-clustering
Transparent replication of popular data


Improved data availability
Replication degree depends on data popularity
Increasing connectivity

The graph becomes more and more connected
Effect of Retrieving Mechanism
Major difference from Gnutella searching


Breadth-first search vs. Depth-first search
Replication over the retrieval path
Limitation

Searching for a document that does not
exist?
Storing data
Calculate binary file key and send insert message
like request (key, hops to live)
When a node receives an insert proposal, it first
checks its own data store


If the key already exists, the users need to try again using
different key
Otherwise, the node looks up the nearest key in its routing
table and forwards the insert to the corresponding node
 If key collision occurs at the adjacent node, the node notifies
the inserted to try another key
If TTL expires without a key collision, an “all clear”
result will be backwarded to the original inserter
Storing data
Effects of insert mechanism:

New files are placed on nodes possessing files with
similar keys
Limitation



How long it takes to insert a file?
How about version management?
Two different files could have the same key and
both may exist in network
 Different users must have different name space
 The same user must use different file description (e.g.,
keywords) for different file
 Security is a concern
Managing data
File replacement is done using LRU


Data items sorted in decreasing order by time of
most recent request/insert
Outdated documents fade away naturally as routing
table entry will remain for a time
File lifetime



The time period of keep a file is unknown
You cannot delete a file from a Freenet – a file will
not disappear unless it is not accessed for a while
No guarantee that a document you submit today
will exist tomorrow
Highlights of Freenet
Pure P2P - similar to Gnutella,

Provides anonymity
 Neither data producer and retriever can be
identified

Searching/Storing/Managing are all different
 for anonymity and performance purpose
P2P Advantages
Efficient use of resources

Client/Server architecture cannot take advantage of the unused
bandwidth, storage, processing power at the edge of network
Scalability

Each user contributes its resource to the entire community,
instead of just a burden
Reliability



Replicas
Geographic distribution
No single point of failure
Ease of Administration



Nodes self organize
No need to deploy servers to satisfy demand
Built-in fault tolerance, replication, and load balancing
P2P Computing Summary
P2P computing is the sharing of computer resources
by direct exchange between systems

Such resource includes information, processing cycles,
storage, etc.
A P2P network has the following characteristics





Each node behaves as client, server, and router
Nodes are autonomous (no administrative authority)
Network is dynamic: nodes enter and leave the network
frequently
Nodes collaborate directly with each other (not through wellknown servers)
Nodes have widely varying capabilities
Homework 3 (Due 04/20)
Implement a Gnutella network

Network maintenance (60/100 points)
 ping and pong

Nodes being able to retrieve files (40/100)
 query, hit, get