Modeling Peer-to-Peer Connections over a Smartphone Network
Abstract
Smartphones offer a natural platform for building decentralized systems for the common good. A very important problem in such systems is understanding the limitations of building a peer-to-peer (P2P) overlay network, given that today's networking infrastructure is designed with centralized services in mind. We performed measurements over smartphones over several years and collected large amounts of data about, among other things, P2P connection success. Here, we train models of P2P connection success using machine learning based on several features that are observable by the devices. We argue that connection success is a non-trivial function of many such features. Besides this, the predictive models are also rather dynamic and a good model can perform rather badly if it is based on data that is more than a year old. The degree distribution of the P2P network based on this model has an interesting structure. We can identify two modes that roughly correspond to "very closed", and "average" nodes, and a rather long tail that contains relatively open nodes. Our model allows us to perform realistic simulations of very large overlay networks, when combined with device measurement traces. This enables us to have a more informed design of decentralized applications.
References
[1]
[n.d.]. European Commission: General data protection regulation (GDPR). 2018. https://ec.europa.eu/commission/priorities/justice-and-fundamental-rights/data-protection/2018-reform-eu-data-protection-rules.
[2]
[n.d.]. WebRTC 1.0: Real-Time Communication Between Browsers. 2018. https://www.w3.org/TR/webrtc/
[3]
Leo Breiman. 2001. Random forests. Machine learning 45, 1 (2001), 5--32.
[4]
S. Brienza, S. E. Cebeci, S. S. Masoumzadeh, H. Hlavacs, Ö. Özkasap, and G. Anastasi. 2015. A survey on energy efficiency in P2P systems: File distribution, content streaming, and epidemics. ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR) 48, 3 (2015), 1--37.
[5]
Giuliana Carullo, Marco Tambasco, Mario Di Mauro, and Maurizio Longo. 2016. A performance evaluation of WebRTC over LTE. In 2016 12th Annual Conference on Wireless On-demand Network Systems and Services (WONS). IEEE, 1--6.
[6]
François Chollet et al. 2015. Keras. https://keras.io
[7]
John M Cohn, Peter G Finn, Sumabala P Nair, Sanjay B Panikkar, and Veena S Pureswaran. 2019. Autonomous decentralized peer-to-peer telemetry. US Patent 10,257,270.
[8]
M. Di Felice, L. Bedogni, A. Trotta, L. Bononi, F. Panzieri, G. Ruggeri, G. Aloi, V. Loscrì, and P. Pace. 2013. Smartphones like stem cells: Cooperation and evolution for emergency communication in postdisaster scenarios. In 2013 First International Black Sea Conference on Communications and Networking (BlackSeaCom). 28--33.
[9]
Michael Dinitz, Magnús M Halldórsson, Calvin Newport, and Alex Weaver. 2019. The Capacity of Smartphone Peer-To-Peer Networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:1908.01894 (2019).
[10]
Ian Goodfellow, Yoshua Bengio, and Aaron Courville. 2016. Deep Learning. MIT Press. http://www.deeplearningbook.org
[11]
Erkki Harjula, Timo Ojala, and Mika Ylianttila. 2017. Energy-efficient peer-to-peer networking for constrained-capacity mobile environments. In 2017 IFIP/IEEE Symposium on Integrated Network and Service Management (IM). IEEE, 858--864.
[12]
Arto Heikkinen, Timo Koskela, and Mika Ylianttila. 2015. Performance evaluation of distributed data delivery on mobile devices using WebRTC. In 2015 International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing Conference (IWCMC). IEEE, 1036--1042.
[13]
Diederik P. Kingma and Jimmy Ba. 2015. Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization. In 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations, ICLR 2015, San Diego, CA, USA, May 7-9, 2015, Conference Track Proceedings, Yoshua Bengio and Yann LeCun (Eds.).
[14]
Jakub Konecný, H. Brendan McMahan, Felix X. Yu, Peter Richtárik, Ananda Theertha Suresh, and Dave Bacon. 2016. Federated Learning: Strategies for Improving Communication Efficiency. In Private Multi-Party Machine Learning (NIPS 2016 Workshop).
[15]
S. Kosta, V. C. Perta, J. Stefa, P. Hui, and A. Mei. 2013. Clone2clone (c2c): Peer-to-peer networking of smartphones on the cloud. In 5th USENIX Workshop on Hot Topics in Cloud Computing (HotCloud 13).
[16]
Ioana Livadariu, Karyn Benson, Ahmed Elmokashfi, Amogh Dhamdhere, and Alberto Dainotti. 2018. Inferring carrier-grade NAT deployment in the wild. In IEEE INFOCOM 2018-IEEE Conference on Computer Communications. IEEE, 2249--2257.
[17]
S. Loreto and S. P. Romano. 2014. Real-time communication with WebRTC: peer-to-peer in the browser. " O'Reilly Media, Inc.".
[18]
D. C. MacDonald and B. Lowekamp. 2010. NAT behavior discovery using session traversal utilities for NAT (STUN). No. RFC 5780.
[19]
A. Marechal, E. Janczukowicz, and IMT Oln. 2016. TURN Servers Impacts Over WebRTC QoE in 4G Network. In 19th International ICIN Conference-Innovations in Clouds, Internet and Networks. 53--58.
[20]
Brendan McMahan, Eider Moore, Daniel Ramage, Seth Hampson, and Blaise Aguera y Arcas. 2017. Communication-Efficient Learning of Deep Networks from Decentralized Data. In Proceedings of the 20th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Statistics (Proceedings of Machine Learning Research, Vol. 54), Aarti Singh and Jerry Zhu (Eds.). PMLR, Fort Lauderdale, FL, USA, 1273--1282.
[21]
Pramita Mitra and Christian Poellabauer. 2012. Emergency response in smartphone-based mobile ad-hoc networks. In 2012 IEEE International Conference on Communications (ICC). IEEE, 6091--6095.
[22]
Laurence Moroney. 2017. Firebase Cloud Messaging. Apress, Berkeley, CA, USA, 163--188.
[23]
Sayed Muchallil, Maulisa Oktiana, et al. 2015. Energy efficiency of mobile peer-to-peer network based on channel condition and bandwidth. In 2015 International Electronics Symposium (IES). IEEE, 157--162.
[24]
M. E. J. Newman. 2002. Assortative Mixing in Networks. Physical Review Letters 89, 20 (Oct. 2002), 208701.
[25]
Calvin Newport. 2017. Leader election in a smartphone peer-to-peer network. In 2017 IEEE International Parallel and Distributed Processing Symposium (IPDPS). IEEE, 172--181.
[26]
C. Newport and A Weaver. 2019. Random Gossip Processes in Smart-phone Peer-to-Peer Networks. In 2019 15th International Conference on Distributed Computing in Sensor Systems (DCOSS). IEEE, 139--146.
[27]
Róbert Ormándi, István Hegedűs, and Márk Jelasity. 2013. Gossip Learning with Linear Models on Fully Distributed Data. Concurrency and Computation: Practice and Experience 25, 4 (2013), 556--571.
[28]
F. Pedregosa, G. Varoquaux, A. Gramfort, V. Michel, B. Thirion, O. Grisel, M. Blondel, P. Prettenhofer, R. Weiss, V. Dubourg, J. Vanderplas, A. Passos, D. Cournapeau, M. Brucher, M. Perrot, and E. Duchesnay. 2011. Scikit-learn: Machine Learning in Python. Journal of Machine Learning Research 12 (2011), 2825--2830.
[29]
Alex (Sandy) Pentland. 2012. Society's Nervous System: Building Effective Government, Energy, and Public Health Systems. Computer 45, 1 (January 2012), 31--38.
[30]
David Powers and Ailab. 2011. Evaluation: From precision, recall and F-measure to ROC, informedness, markedness and correlation. J. Mach. Learn. Technol 2 (01 2011), 2229--3981.
[31]
Weizhu Qian and Franck Gechter. 2018. Modeling Smartphone Energy Consumption Based on User Behavior Data. In 2018 International Conference on Computational Science and Computational Intelligence (CSCI). IEEE, 788--793.
[32]
Alfredo Rial and George Danezis. 2011. Privacy-preserving smart metering. In Proceedings of the 10th annual ACM workshop on Privacy in the electronic society (WPES'11). ACM, New York, NY, USA, 49--60.
[33]
P. Richter, F. Wohlfart, N. Vallina-Rodriguez, M. Allman, R. Bush, A. Feldmann, C. Kreibich, N. Weaver, and V. Paxson. 2016. A multi-perspective analysis of carrier-grade NAT deployment. In Proceedings of the 2016 Internet Measurement Conference. 215--229.
[34]
Z. Szabó, Á. Berta, K. Téglás, M. Jelasity, and V. Bilicki. 2019. Stunner: A Smart Phone Trace for Developing Decentralized Edge Systems. In Proceedings of the 19th IFIP International Conference on Distributed Applications and Interoperable Systems (DAIS 2019) (Copenhagen, Denmark) (Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 11534), J. Pereira and L. Ricci (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, 108--115.
[35]
Chun-Wei Tsai, Chin-Feng Lai, Ming-Chao Chiang, and L.T. Yang. 2014. Data Mining for Internet of Things: A Survey. Communications Surveys Tutorials, IEEE 16, 1 (2014), 77--97.
[36]
Piotr K Tysowski, Pengxiang Zhao, and Kshirasagar Naik. 2011. Peer to peer content sharing on ad hoc networks of smartphones. In 2011 7th International Wireless Communications and Mobile Computing Conference. IEEE, 1445--1450.
[37]
Ji Wang, Bokai Cao, Philip S. Yu, Lichao Sun, Weidong Bao, and Xi-aomin Zhu. 2018. Deep Learning towards Mobile Applications. In Proceedings of the IEEE 38th International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS 2018). IEEE, Vienna, Austria, 1385--1393.
Index Terms
- Modeling Peer-to-Peer Connections over a Smartphone Network
Recommendations
Cost-effective broadcast for fully decentralized peer-to-peer networks
Fully unstructured and decentralized peer-to-peer networks such as Gnutella are appealing for a variety of applications, among which file-sharing is the most prominent one. The decentralized nature of these systems provides a high degree of robustness ...
Locality in structured peer-to-peer networks
Distributed hash tables (DHTs), used in a number of structured peer-to-peer (P2P) systems, provide efficient mechanisms for resource placement and location. A key distinguishing feature of current DHT systems, such as Chord, Pastry, CAN and Tapestry, is ...
A connection management protocol for promoting cooperation in Peer-to-Peer networks
The existence of a high degree of free riding in Peer-to-Peer (P2P) networks is an important threat that should be addressed while designing P2P protocols. In this paper we propose a connection-based solution that will help to reduce the free riding ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
December 2020
52 pages
ISBN:9781450381970
DOI:10.1145/3428662
Copyright © 2020 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 04 January 2021
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Conference
Middleware '20
Sponsor:
Upcoming Conference
MIDDLEWARE '24
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 72Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)7
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 13 Nov 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
Get Access
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in