Title: A Comparative Analysis of Web and P2P Traffic
1A Comparative Analysis of Web and P2P Traffic
- Naimul Basher (University of Calgary)
- Aniket Mahanti (University of Calgary)
- Anirban Mahanti (IIT, Delhi)
- Carey Williamson (University of Calgary)
- Martin Arlitt (U. Calgary and HP Labs)
- WWW 2008, Beijing
2Introduction
- In the recent past, a significant proportion of
Internet traffic volume was from Web applications
using HTTP. - Web traffic is typically characterized by
small-sized flows, short-lived connections,
asymmetric flow volumes, and well-defined TCP
port usage (e.g., 80, 8080, 443). - The advent of Peer-to-Peer (P2P) file sharing
applications in the past decade has triggered a
major paradigm shift in Internet data exchange. - P2P usage has grown steadily since its inception,
and recent empirical studies report that Web and
P2P together dominate todays Internet traffic.
WWW 2008, Beijing
2
3Web and P2P Characterization
- Question How are they similar/different?
- We use recent packet traces collected at a large
university (30,000 students and employees) to
characterize and compare traffic generated by
current Web and P2P applications. - We also analyze and compare two P2P applications,
BitTorrent and Gnutella. - We primarily focus on characterizing these
applications at the flow-level and host-level. - Our work develops flow-level distributional
models that may be used to refine Internet
traffic models for use in network simulations
and emulation experiments.
WWW 2008, Beijing
3
4Preview of Results
WWW 2008, Beijing
4
5Trace Collection Methodology
- Full packet traces were collected using lindump
from the 100 Mbps full duplex commercial Internet
connection of the University of Calgary. - Since P2P applications frequently use random
ports, we used payload signatures to identify
applications. - We used bro, a network intrusion detection system
(IDS), to perform payload signature matching and
map network flows to traffic types. - We used non-contiguous 1-hour traces collected
each morning and evening on Thursday through
Sunday between April 6 and April 30, 2006.
WWW 2008, Beijing
5
6Trace Summary
WWW 2008, Beijing
6
7Characterization Metrics
- Flow-level characterization metrics
- Flow size total bytes transferred during a
connection. Mice transfer lt 10 KB. Elephants
transfer gt 5 MB. (Others are called Buffalo) - Flow duration the time between the start and
the end of a TCP flow (e.g., SYN and FIN). - Flow inter-arrival time (IAT) the time between
two consecutive flow arrivals. - Host-level characterization metrics
- Flow concurrency the maximum number of TCP
flows a single host uses concurrently to transfer
content to/from one or more hosts. - Transfer volume the total bytes transferred to
(downstream) and from (upstream) a host. - Geographic distribution the distribution of the
distance between hosts and U of C along the
surface of the Earth.
WWW 2008, Beijing
7
8Flow Sizes Web and P2P
P2P model Hybrid Pareto and Weibull Web model
Hybrid Pareto and Weibull
WWW 2008, Beijing
- P2P applications generate many small-sized flows
and many very large-sized flows (many more than
Web applications generate). - Small-sized P2P flows arise from signaling,
aborted transfers, and conn attempts to
unresponsive peers. - We also find some very large P2P flows, which are
much larger than the large Web transfers.
8
9Flow Sizes Gnutella and BitTorrent
BitTorrent model Hybrid Lognormal and Pareto
Gnutella model Hybrid Lognormal and Pareto
WWW 2008, Beijing
- Gnutella and BitTorrent generate similar
percentages of small-sized flows (e.g., control
info exchanged between peers). - Gnutella generates more large-sized flows than
BitTorrent. - Gnutella usually downloads entire object from a
single peer. - BitTorrent uses file segmentation to split an
object into multiple equal-sized pieces (e.g.,
256 KB), and downloads the pieces using parallel
flows and/or persistent connections.
9
10Mice and Elephant Phenomenon
Application Mice Flows Mice Bytes Elephant Flows Elephant Bytes
Web 76 9 0.04 15
P2P 93 0.5 1 93
Gnutella 83 0.1 3 93
BitTorrent 95 2 0.1 95
- Web mice flows account for a relatively higher
proportion of total Web bytes than P2P mice flows
do for total P2P bytes. - P2P elephant flows are larger than Web elephant
flows. - BitTorrent mice flows, on average, are larger
than Gnutella mice flows because of BitTorrents
signaling activities. - BitTorrent elephant flows, on average, are larger
than Gnutella elephant flows. - Gnutella users share mostly audio files, while
BitTorrent users share more video files.
CacheLogic P2P Study 2005
WWW 2008, Beijing
10
11Flow Durations Web and P2P
P2P model Hybrid Weibull and Pareto Web
model Two-mode Pareto
WWW 2008, Beijing
- Approx. 70 of Web durations are lt 1 sec
indicating low response times for Web requests
(i.e., good Internet connectivity on campus). - Approx. 30 of P2P flows are shorter than 30 sec.
These often are signaling
flows, or failed/aborted flows. - Some P2P mice flows have long durations due to
repeated unsuccessful connection attempts. - Approx. 40 of P2P flow durations are between 20
and 200 sec. These reflect bandwidth-limited
connections.
11
12Flow Durations Gnutella and BitTorrent
BitTorrent model Hybrid Lognormal and
Pareto Gnutella model Hybrid Lognormal and
Pareto
WWW 2008, Beijing
- BitTorrent flows typically last longer than
Gnutella flows. - Longer BitTorrent flows resulted due to its
protocol architecture concurrent flows, fixed
number of uploads/downloads permitted, persistent
connections. - Gnutella can use a single flow for downloading an
object (no need to share bandwidth with
concurrent flows).
12
13Flow Concurrency Web and P2P
- Many P2P hosts in our network maintain only a
single TCP connection (a surprising result). - A significant proportion of internal Web hosts
maintain more than one concurrent TCP connection.
- Web browsers often initiate multiple concurrent
connections to transfer content in parallel. - High degree of Web flow concurrency (gt 30) is due
to Web proxies, browser accelerators, and content
distribution nodes.
WWW 2008, Beijing
13
14Distinct IP Addresses for Concurrent Flows
Web
P2P
WWW 2008, Beijing
- Web tends to have multiple concurrent flows to
same host. - P2P hosts use concurrent flows to connect to many
hosts. - P2P protocols encourage connectivity with
multiple hosts to facilitate widespread sharing
of data.
14
15Flow Concurrency Gnutella and BT
WWW 2008, Beijing
- Most Gnutella hosts connect with only one host at
a time. - We observed a few Gnutella hosts with gt 10
concurrent TCP connections. These hosts acted as
super-peers in Gnutellas peer hierarchy. - Most BitTorrent hosts exhibit a high degree of
flow concurrency, which is a design feature of
BitTorrent.
15
16Transfer Symmetry P2P Applications
System Freeloader Fair-share Benefactor
Gnutella 57 10 33
BitTorrent 10 40 50
- Transfer symmetry is a major concern for P2P
system developers, who want to encourage fair
sharing among participating peers. - We observe pronounced freeloading in Gnutella,
and greater fairness in BitTorrent. - Gnutella host behavior appears to be dominated by
extreme upstream and downstream transfers. - BitTorrents tit-for-tat mechanism encourages
uploading for the opportunity to download.
WWW 2008, Beijing
16
17Heavy Hitters Web and P2P
WWW 2008, Beijing
- Heavy hitters are the few hosts that account for
much of the traffic volume transferred. - Heavy hitters are present in both Web and P2P.
- Top-ranked P2P hosts transfer an order of
magnitude more data than top-ranked Web hosts. - Most P2P heavy hitters are either freeloaders or
benefactors. - The total amount of data transferred by the top
10 of Web and P2P hosts follows a power-law
distribution.
17
18Geographic Distribution Web and P2P
WWW 2008, Beijing
- Approx. 75 of external Web hosts are in North
America. Europe and Asia account for another 10
each. - A majority of our Web campus users are English
speaking, and thus are likely to visit Web sites
located in predominantly English-speaking
countries. - Approx. 40 of P2P hosts are located within North
America. - This indicates that connectivity between P2P
hosts does not strongly rely on host locality,
rather it depends on resource availability during
connection establish phase.
18
19Geographic Distribution Gnutella and BT
- Approx. 70 of Gnutella hosts are located in
North America. - This suggest either Gnutella peers prefer to
connect with hosts that are in close proximity or
that Gnutella clients are widely used in North
America for file sharing. - Approx. 30 BitTorrent hosts are located in North
America and approx. 40 are located in Europe. - We believe that the list of trackers is created
based on host bandwidth availability in a swarm,
and we see a bias towards regions with high
broadband penetration.
WWW 2008, Beijing
19
20Effect of Network Traffic Management
- At the University of Calgary, traffic is managed
using a commercial packet shaping device. - At the time of capture the network policy was to
group together all identified P2P flows and
collectively limit their bandwidth to 56 Kbps. - We do not observe a strong positive correlation
between flow size and duration. - Some P2P flows are indeed identified and limited
by the traffic shaper, however, we do see many
other P2P flows that escaped detection by the
traffic shaper. - Our results provide a snapshot of Web and P2P
characteristics from a large edge network, and
should be representative of other edge networks
with similar user population and network
management policies.
WWW 2008, Beijing
20
21Summary of Results
WWW 2008, Beijing
21
22Conclusions and Future Work
- Our work presented an extensive characterization
study of Web and P2P traffic using full packet
traces collected at a large edge network (U of C
campus). - We observed a number of contrasting features
between Web and P2P traffic using flow-level and
host-level metrics. - Flow-level distributional models were developed
for Web and P2P traffic. These can be used in
network simulation and emulation experiments. - Traffic from other networks should be studied to
facilitate development of general models for Web
and P2P traffic. - Impact of other non-Web applications, such as P2P
VoIP and IPTV, can be studied as well.
WWW 2008, Beijing
22
23FLOW MODELS
WWW 2008, Beijing
23
24Inter-Arrival Times Web and P2P
P2P model Hybrid Weibull and Pareto Web model
Two-mode Weibull
- Web flow IAT are much shorter than those of P2P
flows. - Web traffic has a higher arrival rate (80
flows/sec) compared to P2P traffic (6 flows/sec). - Another factor contributing to the lower arrival
rate and the longer IAT values for P2P flows is
the persistent nature of their TCP connections.
WWW 2008, Beijing
24
25Transfer Volume Web and P2P
- Approx. 50 of Web and P2P hosts transfer small
amounts of data (lt 1 MB) and are typically active
for lt 100 sec. - P2P hosts that repeatedly yet unsuccessfully
attempt connecting to peers. - Web hosts that browse the Web, widgets that
retrieve information from the Web periodically,
and downloading small files. - Approx. 35 of Web and 15 of P2P hosts transfer
data lt 10 MB and are active for lt 1000 sec. - P2P hosts that share small objects.
- Web hosts that browse the Web for prolonged
periods, downloading software/multimedia, and
HTTP-based streaming.
WWW 2008, Beijing
25