The Chinese Solar Machine Layer by Layer Fire in the Library The Mystery Behind Anesthesia
Tangled web: The image above shows the hierarchical structure of the Internet, based on the connections between individual nodes (such as service providers). Three distinct regions are apparent: an inner core of highly connected nodes, an outer periphery of isolated networks, and a mantle-like mass of peer-connected nodes. The bigger the node, the more connections it has. Those nodes that are closest to the center are connected to more well-connected nodes than are those on the periphery.
Lanet-vi program of I. Alvarez-Hamelin et al.
Multimedia
Routing traffic through peer-to-peer networks could stave off Internet congestion, according to a new study.
The increased use of peer-to-peer communications could improve the overall capacity of the Internet and make it run much more smoothly. That's the conclusion of a novel study mapping the structure of the Internet.
It's the first study to look at how the Internet is organized in terms of function, as well as how it's connected, says Shai Carmi, a physicist who took part in the research at the Bar Ilan University, in Israel. "This gives the most complete picture of the Internet available today," he says.
While efforts have been made previously to plot the topological structure in terms of the connections between Internet nodes--computer networks or Internet Service Providers that act as relay stations for carrying information about the Net--none have taken into account the role that these connections play. "Some nodes may not be as important as other nodes," says Carmi.
The researchers' results depict the Internet as consisting of a dense core of 80 or so critical nodes surrounded by an outer shell of 5,000 sparsely connected, isolated nodes that are very much dependent upon this core. Separating the core from the outer shell are approximately 15,000 peer-connected and self-sufficient nodes.
Take away the core, and an interesting thing happens: about 30 percent of the nodes from the outer shell become completely cut off. But the remaining 70 percent can continue communicating because the middle region has enough peer-connected nodes to bypass the core.
With the core connected, any node is able to communicate with any other node within about four links. "If the core is removed, it takes about seven or eight links," says Carmi. It's a slower trip, but the data still gets there. Carmi believes we should take advantage of these alternate pathways to try to stop the core of the Internet from clogging up. "It can improve the efficiency of the Internet because the core would be less congested," he says.
To build their map of the Internet, published in the latest issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the researchers enlisted the assistance of 5,000 online volunteers who downloaded a program to help identify the connections between the 20,000 known nodes.
The distributed program sends information requests, or pings, to other parts of the Internet and records the route of the information on each journey.
Previous efforts had relied upon only a few dozen large computers to carry out this task, says Carmi. But by using this distributed approach, which meant collecting up to six million measurements a day over a period of two years from thousands of observation points around the world, it was possible to reveal more connections, says Scott Kirkpatrick, a professor of computer science and engineering at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, who also took part in the study. In fact, the project has already identified about 20 percent more of the interconnections between Internet nodes than ever before.
Full citation and comparison with CAIDA
This was a fascinating article, and left me looking for more information. I have a draft blog entry posted with some initial comments, and I'll update based on your feedback! I hope it was okay to grab the image to illustrate this blog post, I do link back to this Technology Review article as the source.
http://www.ofoghlu.net/log/2007/06/mapping_the_internet.html
I have three questions, the first being a request rather than a question, for the full citation for the article mentioned in passing, "published in the latest issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences", maybe the latest issue linked is now a more recent one, as it didn't seem to be there? In addition I couldn't find it listed on the first author's home page, but I did find an earlier article (that I linked in the blog entry).
The second question is how, if at all, this work relates/compares to the CAIDA work on AS topology mapping for IPv4 and IPv6, and their tools such as skitter? I was surprised CAIDA this similar work wasn't mentioned in the article I did find, that did seem based on a very similar AS topology analysis, at a high level.
The third is whether the tool you used could be used to map IPv6 as well as IPv4 topologies? I'm just downloading and installing the DIME client now....
NetAlter is in the process of developing a P2P enabled Browser which when installed on a computer will allow direct communication between users and offer most of the functionality of present Web based solutions.
In addition NetAlter promises to be free from hacking and virus. More information on this available on their website. netalter.com
Guest (Britt Borden)
Re: P2P Browser in Development
Yes, I checked out their web site, very interesting. This is exactly the type of alternate route that this article is suggesting.
This 3 region map of the Internet is similar to this other 3 region map of a social network. Both nets have...
1) dense core
2) less connected periphery
3) outer ring of isolates
http://orgnet.com/emergent_community2.png
There is a curious difference that comes up with social networks, when compared with global communications networks. The AS graph of the internet (also the IP-based graphs) are a single connected graph, with a single nucleus. When we do this analysis on, e.g. the well-studied movie actor graph or some not yet published data from chat group networks, we find that the graphs may not be connected, and that they have multiple nuclei found at different depths. The different groups are joined at the outer nodes, rather than all cascading down to a single nucleus. Haven't checked yet, but I expect this multi-center structure might hold for chemical networks seen in cell biology.
scott
Guest (Britt Borden)
The article says: With the core connected, any node is able to communicate with any other node within about four links. "If the core is removed, it takes about seven or eight links," says Carmi. It's a slower trip, but the data still gets there".
The speed of light (and electricity) is 186,000 miles a second, so even a slower trip should be pretty fast; this seems like a good idea to stop congestion at the core; this is like when a highway is backed up and cars start taking an alternate route - these alternate routes are also normally slower roads, but when the highway is going 10 MPH a 35 MPH road looks pretty good. Posted by Dr Britt Borden MD.
Manufacturing in the United States is in trouble. That's bad news not just for the country's economy but for the future of innovation.
brunascle
65 Comments
more info!
very good read. i'd love more details, though.
when you say "node", you mean routers, correct? and the core would be mostly the routers on the main internet backbone? a PC wouldnt really be a "node" in this sense, because your ISP would only be sending you packets that are meant for you and not ones to be routed further, right?
and how exactly does someone become router? how could you be connected at that level, above the ISP? and do the main routers only forward packets to a white-list of other routers, or do they send them to everyone they're connected to?
Reply
Guest (scott kirkpatrick)
Re: more info!
The DIMES client that does all the measurement runs "traceroute" measurements which bring back the series of IP addresses along which its packets travel. But that's only the raw data. We resolve it to ASes (autonomous systems -- that's net-speak for an ISP and these range from serving small neighborhoods to covering several continents). But when we construct the net graph of physical connections using IP addresses, or using routers (which operate from multiple addresses), the same three part structure -- isolated nodes, peer-connected nodes, and a well-defined nucleus -- is found.
One small error in the article: My institution is the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. At Tel Aviv University you will find Yuval Shavitt and Eran Shir, who created the Dimes client which does all the measurements. Also the website, http://www.netdimes.org from which we hope you will download and install our measurement client, and join us in measureing the Internet.
scott
Reply
Rachel Kremen
6 Comments
Re: more info!
Thank you Scott, for pointing out that error. We've corrected it in the story.
Reply
Guest (Britt Borden)
Re: more info!
I, Dr Britt Borden think it is good to know that the Technology Review staff is looking at comments.
Reply
quksilver
1 Comment
Re: more info!
Wait, so you're graphs are of connections between ASes? You resolved the IPs of routers from traceroutes in the DIMES project to the AS that originated the IPs? Then you graphed the connections between ASes?
In that case, those 80 "nodes" comprising the core of the Internet are actually *huge* networks, and removing any one, much less all, of those "nodes" would hardly be a trivial task. Plus, it seems pretty silly to even consider what removing those 80 nodes might do. That requires the assumption that removing those 80 nodes would not affect the rest of the nodes in any way. And anything that could remove even one of the nodes in its entirety would likely affect a fairly significant portion of the non-core nodes.
Reply
Guest (Britt Borden)
Re: more info!
Yes, it is true that anything that could remove perhaps only one of the nodes in its entirety would probably affect a significant portion of the non-core nodes as well, Dr Britt Borden MD.
Reply