1. Symphony: Distributed Hashing in a Small World Gurmeet Singh Manku Mayank Bawa Prabhakar Raghavan Presented by Satpreet Singh

2. Motivation GOAL: To maintain a large DHT over a WAN DESIRED CHARACTERISTICS: Scalability (work for a range of network sizes) Stability (handle churn) Performance (provide low-latency lookups & low maintenance costs with churn) Flexibility (provide design knobs, preferably run-time) Simplicity (easy to understand, code, deploy…) SOLUTION: Symphony (fuses ideas from Chord & Klienberg’s Small World greedy routing algorithm/result)

3. Features/Advantages of Symphony 1.Low state maintenance (conseq. of low degree) Fewer pings/keep-alives, less (ambient) control traffic Distributed locking and coordination overhead over smaller sets of nodes Smaller bootstrapping time when a node joins Smaller recovery time when a node leaves 2. Smooth out-degree vs latency tradeoff Only protocol that offers this tuning knob even at run time! Out-degree not fixed at runtime, or as function of network size. 3. Flexibility and support for heterogeneity Different nodes can have different number of links 4. Fault tolerance Only short links are bolstered. No backups for long links

4. Architecture: Overview node long link short link A typical Symphony network Establish keyspace as [0, 1) (wrap around a ring like in Chord) Every node ‘manages’ subrange from own-id. to next-clockwise- node’s-id. (~ equi-sized) Objects hash to m-bit hash-key K, managed by node that manages real number containing K/2 m 2 Short-links: one with each immediate neighbor

5. Architecture: Overview node long link short link A typical Symphony network k (≥ 1) Long Links (uni-/bi-direct.) - draws a rand. number (x) from a Probability Distribution Function - contacts manager of (x) using a Routing Protocol - Establishes a link (if incoming links at manager ≤ 2k, if not resample PDF) PDF is a type of harmonic distribution (so, Symphony) P n (x) = 1/(x ln [n]) in x Є [1/n, 1] = 0 otherwise PDF estimates [n] using an Estimation Protocol

6. Network Size Estimation Protocol Goal: to estimate ‘n’ - the current total number of nodes in the DHT So if, - S is any set of s distinct nodes, -X s is the sum of segment-lengths managed by them, Estimated n = s/X s All s nodes update their estimate, Experimentally s = 3 found good enough, So simply use node and it’s two immediate neighbors Fact: Impact of increasing s on avg. latency is insignificant x = Length of arc 1/x = Estimate of n (Idea from Viceroy)

7. Routing Protocol(s) Klienberg’s Small World result: A message can be routed to any node by greedy routing in O(log 2 n) hops, in a construction where each node has one link to each of it’s 4 directional neighbors and a single long-distance link to a node chosen from a suitable PDF. To lookup hash key x Є [0,1), contact the manager of x : Unidirectional Routing Protocol: Node forwards a lookup for x along (short or long) link that minimizes the clockwise distance to x Bidirectional Routing Protocol: Node forwards a lookup for x along (short or long) link that minimizes the absolute distance to x In both cases, expected path length in an n-node network with k = O(1) links is O(1/k log 2 n) hops. Bidirectional & 1-Lookahead reduce latency by 40% and 30% each

8. Join/Leave Protocols JOIN: The new node chooses its id x from [0, 1) uniformly at random Using the routing protocol it identifies the current manager of x It then runs the estimation protocol using s = 3 X then uses P n x to establish its long distance links Cost = k links * O(1/k log 2 n) msgs. = O(log 2 n) messages LEAVE: All out- and in- links to x’s long distance neighbors are snapped Other nodes whose outgoing links to x are just broken, reinstate those links with other nodes The immediate neighbors of x establish short-links between themselves Successor of x initiates estimation protocol over s = 3 neighbors Cost = O(log 2 n) messages

9. Re-linking Protocols etc… RE-LINKING: n x = x’s current estimate of n n x link = x’s estimate when long distance links were last established When n x and n x link differ → stale estimate Re-link only when n x / n x link is not in the range [0.5, 2] Re-linking gains are marginal, cost high: O(log 2 n) messages LOOKAHEAD: Node can maintain list of neighbor’s neighbors Improves choice of neighbor for routing queries No extra messages – piggyback on keep-alives of TCP link Cost = O(k 2 ) space. Number of long-links remains unchanged FAULT TOLERANCE: Deletion of short links more detrimental as leads to node isolation Make f copies of node’s content in f next clockwise nodes

10. Experimental Data: SETUP: Large DHT: 2 5 to 2 15 nodes simulated in network Four kinds of test networks: Static, Expanding, Expanding-Relink & Dynamic Estimate Protocol Performance: estimate improves for log(n) neighbors, but impact on avg. latency is minimal (later)

11. Experimental Data: Routing Protocol Performance: Increasing links beyond 2 has marginal benefits. Bidirectional routing is good (30% reduction in latency)

12. Experimental Data: Lookahead Performance: 1-Lookahead reduces avg. latency by 40% for small value of k. Also, it does not entail an increase in the no. of long-links per node. Neighbor-lists are exchanged periodically piggy-backed on normal routing traffic or keep-alives

13. Experimental Data: Fault-tolerance motivation: [Left] On deleting a random set of links (short + long), successful lookups drops quite quickly [deletion of short links causes node isolation quickly] [Right] Impact of removing only long links not as severe (and only avg. latency goes up) Thus, only fortify short links. Make f copies of content in clockwise direction.

14. Comparisons & Conclusions: Conclusions: For large DHTs, ( 2 5 to 2 15 nodes) Symphony outperforms others Avg. TCP links = 10; Latency is about 8 hops; Lower costs of Join/Leave compared to Chord etc. Number of neighbors not fixed at outset; No backup links

15. Wrapping up… Symphony... is a simple protocol for managing large DHTs supports a dynamic network of hosts with relatively short lifetimes scales well has low lookup latency has low maintenance cost requires few neighbors per node supports heterogenity in nodes (run-time knobs) provides flexibility in design Questions… ?