Difference between revisions of "Private:pCDN:Peer Matching"
From NMSL
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | ||
== Proposed Algorithm == | == Proposed Algorithm == | ||
| Line 36: | Line 36: | ||
== References and Links == | == References and Links == | ||
| − | * | + | * IP to ASNum Mapping project from Team CYRMU |
| + | ** http://www.team-cymru.org/?sec=8&opt=26 | ||
| + | * CAIDA's Inter-AS relationships | ||
| + | ** http://as-rank.caida.org/data/2008/as-rel.20080414.a0.01000.txt | ||
| + | * On AS-level Path Inference | ||
| + | ** http://www.eecs.umich.edu/~zmao/Papers/routescope.pdf | ||
| + | * AT & T IP-Range and ASNum mapping | ||
| + | ** a. http://www.research.att.com/~jiawang/as_traceroute/ | ||
Revision as of 12:17, 25 April 2008
Proposed Algorithm
Ideas
- Verification of AS Shortest Paths
- Experimental Setup
- # Peers: {100, 300, 500, 1000, 3000, 5000, 8000}
- # Senders: {2, 5, 10, 15, 20}
- # Sessions: 1000
- Algos: Random, Network, Geo, AS_Order(ISP-Friendly)
- Metrics: Min, Avg, Max, Output
- Output: Hops (Aggregate, P2P, C2P)
- Search Efficiency:
- If multiple shortest paths are existing, choose the least "cost" (s2s=0, p2p=1, c2p=2)
- Check practicality
- What kind of data we need initially and periodically
- How often we need them
- We implement the algorithm to determine AS relationships
- Large graphs
- Can we get the US & CA graph?
- Can we optimize this matrix.
- Usage of ISP + Network / Geolocation Algorithms
- We reduce the number of IP hops
- Diameter of the graph
References and Links
- IP to ASNum Mapping project from Team CYRMU
- CAIDA's Inter-AS relationships
- On AS-level Path Inference
- AT & T IP-Range and ASNum mapping
