| Y. Chawathe, S. McCanne, and E. Brewer. An Architecture for Internet Content Distribution as an Infrastructure Service, 2000. |
....the nearest member node using a flooding message when it tries to join a multicast group. In the hybrid peer to peer architecture, a control node informs a node of the nearest member node in response to the node s request. Peer to peer multicast is similar to ALM (Application layer multicast) 9] [10] [11] These forwarding mechanisms might be adopted in peer to peer multicast with some modifications. Additionally, bi directional shared minimum spanning tree Fig. 2. Pure peer to peer and hybrid peer to peer Fig.3.Peer to peer multicast mechanism Fig. 1. The mobile peer to peer architecture ....
Y. Chawathe, S. McCanne, and E. A. Brewer, "An architecture for internet content distribution as an infrastructure service", Feb. 2000, Unpublished work.
....to overcome the lack of IP Multicast, which makes the problem challenging, by implementing the multicast paradigm at the application layer based on IP Unicast services only. They can be categorized into two classes: overlay router approach and peer to peer approach. In the overlay router approach [9], 10] 11] 12] 13] 14] a number of reliable servers are installed across the network to act as the software routers with multicast functionality. These routers are interconnected according to a topology which forms an overlay for running the services. The content is transmitted from the ....
Y. Chawathe, S. McCanne, and E. Brewer, "An architecture for internet content distribution as an infras- tructure service," Unpublished work, February 2000.
....over that topology. 2.1 Measurement based Overlays Measurement based overlays are constructed primarily using active measurements of network properties such as latency between overlay nodes. Several algorithms for building these kind of overlays exist, most of which target multicast services [15, 4, 34, 16, 23, 20, 17, 9]. We study Narada [15] and NICE [4] both of which are optimized for latency. Narada creates a at i.e no hierarchal overlay topology that minimizes the latency between nodes while keeping a small number of tunnels per node. This is accomplished by choosing an initial set of tunnels, and ....
....same time CAN with Shortest Path routing and TopologyAware overlay construction performs comparably to NICE, which again points favorably towards the potential of optimization in DHT based approaches. 6 Related Work Many overlay construction schemes have been proposed, both measurement based [15, 4, 20, 2, 23, 9, 34, 17] and DHT based [27, 30, 28, 37] Much ongoing work aims to improve the performance of DHTbased approaches [5, 36, 38, 24, 33, 31, 11] and the scalability of measurement based approaches [4, 20] as well as look at how DHT based approaches can provide multicast and other services [25, 7, 39, 31] ....
Y. Chawathe, S. McCanne, and E. Brewer. An architecture for internet content distribution as an infrastructure service, Unpublished work, 2000.
....the lack of IP Multicast, which makes the problem challenging, by implementing the multicast paradigm at the application layer based on IP Unicast services only. They can be categorized into two classes: overlay router approach and peer to peer (P2P) approach. In the overlay router approach [4] [9 13], a number of reliable servers are installed across the network to act as the software routers with multicast functionality. These routers are interconnected according to a topology which forms an overlay for running the services. The content is transmitted from the source to a set of receivers on ....
Y. Chawathe, S. McCanne, and E. Brewer, "An architecture for internet content distribution as an infrastructure service," Unpublished work, February 2000.
....overlay protocols have the advantage of incremental deployability. Early overlays such as the M Bone [3] and the 6 Bone [4] were intended as transitional solutions, but overlays have since been recognized as an e ective, permanent way to deploy new services, including application level multicast [5, 6] and peer to peer networks [1, 2, 7, 8, 9] Because the topology of an overlay may di er from that of the underlying physical network, the overlay may be inecient: packets owing over distinct virtual links may cross the same physical link, and the route of a single packet through the overlay may ....
....restricting them to group sizes of approximate 100 nodes. 2.1 Overlay Performance Metrics We use multicast as a representative driving application to quantify the eciency of an overlay. Several recent proposals have discussed overlay management in the context of application level multicast [5, 12, 6, 13]; the proposals typically construct multicast distribution trees rooted at the source of a multicast transmission. Regardless of the speci c details of each particular proposal, two metrics that can be used to evaluate performance are relative delay penalty (RDP) and stress. RDP is a measure of ....
[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]
Yatin Chawathe, S. McCanne, and Eric Brewer, \An Architecture for Internet Content Distribution as an Infrastructure Service," February 2000.
No context found.
Y. Chawathe, S. McCanne, and E. Brewer. An Architecture for Internet Content Distribution as an Infrastructure Service, 2000.
No context found.
Y. Chawathe, S. McCanne, and E. A. Brewer. An Architecture for Internet Content Distributions as an Infrastructure Service, 2000. Unpublished, http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/yatin/papers/.
No context found.
Y. Chawathe, S. McCanne, and E. A. Brewer. An Architecture for Internet Content Distributions as an Infrastructure Service, 2000. Unpublished, http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/yatin/papers/.
No context found.
CHAWATHE, Y., MCCANNE, S., AND BREWER, E. A. An architecture for internet content distribution as an infrastructure service. http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/yatin, 1999.
No context found.
Y. Chawathe, S. McCane, and E. Brewer. An architecture for internet content distribution as an infrastructure service, Feb. 2000.
No context found.
Y. Chawathe, S. McCanne, and E. A. Brewer. An Architecture for Internet Content Distributions as an Infrastructure Service, 2000. Unpublished, http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/yatin/papers/.
No context found.
Y. Chawathe, S. McCanne, and E. A. Brewer. An Architecture for Internet Content Distributions as an Infrastructure Service, 2000. Unpublished, http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/yatin/papers/.
No context found.
Y. Chawathe, S. McCanne, and E. A. Brewer. An Architecture for Internet Content Distributions as an Infrastructure Service, 2000. Unpublished, http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/yatin/papers/.
No context found.
Y. Chawathe, S. McCanne, and E. A. Brewer. An Architecture for Internet Content Distributions as an Infrastructure Service, 2000. Unpublished, http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/yatin/papers/.
No context found.
Y. Chawathe, S. McCanne, and E. A. Brewer. An Architecture for Internet Content Distributions as an Infrastructure Service, 2000. Unpublished, http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/yatin/papers/.
No context found.
Y. Chawathe, S. McCanne, and E. A. Brewer. An Architecture for Internet Content Distribution as an Infrastructure Service. Ph.D. Thesis, Fall 2000.
No context found.
Y. Chawathe, S. McCanne, and E. A. Brewer. An Architecture for Internet Content Distributions as an Infrastructure Service, 2000. Unpublished, http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/yatin/papers/.
No context found.
Y. Chawathe, S. McCanne, and E. A. Brewer, "An architecture for Internet content distribution as an infrastructure service," Feb. 2000, available at http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/ yatin/papers/scattercast.ps.
No context found.
Y. Chawathe, S. McCanne, and E. Brewer. An architecture for internet content distribution as an infrastructure service, 2000.
No context found.
CHAWATHE, Y., MCCANNE S., AND BREWER E. An Architecture for Internet Content Distribution as an Infastructure Service. Feburary 2000. Unpublished work.
No context found.
CHAWATHE,Y.,MCCANNE, S., AND BREWER, E. An architecture for internet content distribution as an infrastructure service, February 2000. Unpublished. http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/ yatin/papers/.
No context found.
Y. Chawathe, S. McCane, and E. Brewer. An architecture for internet content distribution as an infrastructure service, Feb. 2000.
No context found.
Yatin Chawathe, Steven McCanne, and Eric Brewer. An architecture for internet content distribution as an infrastructure service. available at http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/ yatin/papers, 2000.
No context found.
CHAWATHE, Y., MCCANNE, S., AND BREWER, E. An architecture for internet content distribution as an infrastructure service. available at http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/ yatin/papers, 2000.
No context found.
Y. Chawathe, S. McCanne, and E. Brewer, "An architecture for internet content distribution as an infrastructure service," available at http://www.cs.berkeley.edu/ yatin/papers, 2000.
First 50 documents
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC