Skip to content

Peer To Peer Topology Analysis Essay

Topological analysis of intelligent agent networks provides crucial information about the structure of agent distribution over a network. Performance analysis of agent network topologies helps multi-agent system developers to understand the impact of topology on system efficiency and effectiveness. Appropriate topology analysis enables the adoption of suitable frameworks for specific multi-agent systems. In this paper, we systematically classify agent network topologies and propose a novel hybrid topology for distributed multi-agent systems. We compare the performance of this topology with two other common agent network topologies—centralised and decentralised topologies—within a new multi-agent framework, called Agent-based Open Connectivity for DSS (AOCD). Three major aspects are studied for estimating topology performance, which include (i) transmission time for a set of requests; (ii) waiting time for processing requests; and (iii) memory consumption for storing agent information. We also conduct a set of AOCD topological experiments to compare the performance of hybrid and centralised agent network topologies and illustrate our experimental results in this paper.

  • [1]

    F. S. Annexstein, K. A. Berman, M. A. Jovanovic. “Latency effects on reachability in large-scale peer-to-peer networks”. Proceedings of the ACM Symposium on Parallel Algorithms and Architectures, pp.84–92. 2001Google Scholar

  • [2]

    M. Ripeanu. “Peer-to-Peer Architecture Case Study: Gnutella Network”. Technical Report, University of Chicago. TR-2001-26. 2001Google Scholar

  • [3]

    M. Jovanovic, F.S. Annexstein, and K.A. Berman. “Scalability Issues in Large Peer-to-Peer Networks—A Case Study of Gnutella”. Technical Report, University of Cincinnati, 2001.Google Scholar

  • [4]

    J. Ritter, Why Gnutella Can not Scale. No, Really!. 20.03.2002

  • [5]

    M. Ripeanu, I. Foster. “Mapping the gnutella network”. IEEE Internet Computing Journal. 6(1). 2002Google Scholar

  • [6]

    K. Anderson, “Analysis of the traffic on the gnutella network” 2001," Key=". 14.05.02

  • [7]

    S. Saroiu, P. K. Gummadi, S. D. Gribble. “A Measurement Study of Peer-to-Peer File Sharing Systems”. Proceedings of Multimedia Computing and Networking 2002 (MMCN’ 02).2002.Google Scholar

  • [8]

    E. P. Markatos, “Tracing a large-scale Peer to Peer System: an hour in the life of Gnutella”. Proceedings of 2nd IEEE/ACM International Symposium on Cluster Computing and the Grid. 2002Google Scholar

  • [9]

    R. Schollmeier. “A definition of Peer-to-Peer networking towards a delimitation against classical client server concepts”. Proceedings of WATM-Eunice 2001. 2001Google Scholar

  • [10]

    R. Schollmeier, G. Schollmeier. “Why Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Does Scale: An Analysis of Peer-to-Peer Traffic Patterns”. IEEE International Conference on P2P Computing 2002, Linköping Sweden. September 2002.Google Scholar

  • [11]

    K. Aberer, M. Punceva, M. Hauswirth, R. Schmidt. „Improving Data Access in P2P Systems“. IEEE Internet Computing Journal. 6(1). 2002Google Scholar

  • [12]

    E. Adar, B. A. Huberman. “Free riding on gnutella”. Appeared in First Monday. 2000.Google Scholar

  • [13]

    Gnutella Protocol Specification, version 0.4; available at,20.03.2002/GnutellaProtocol04.pdf,20.03.2002

  • [14]

    T. Klingberg, R. Manfredi. “Gnutella 0.6 RFC”. June 2002, Scholar

  • [15]

    L. Adamic, R. Lukose, A. Puniyani, B. Huberman, “Search in Power-Law Networks”. Phys. Rev. E, 64 46135. 2001CrossRefGoogle Scholar

  • [16]

    B. Krishnamurthy, J. Wang, and Y. Xie. “Early Measurements of a Cluster-based Architecture for P2P Systems”. Proceedings of SIGCOMM IMW 2001, California, pp. 105–109. 2001Google Scholar

  • [17]

    G. Foest, R. Paffrath. “Peer-to-Peer (P2P) and beyond”. DFN Mitteilungen 58-3. 2002Google Scholar

  • [18] “Current network size”. 15.05.2002

  • [19]

    Deutsches Forschungsnetz 18.05.02Google Scholar

  • [20]

    Stoica, R. Morris, D. Karger, M. F. Kaashoek, and H. Balakrishnan. “Chord: A scalable peer-to-peer lookup service for Internet applications”. Technical Report TR-819, MIT, March 2001.Google Scholar

  • [21]

    I. T. Rowstron and P. Druschel. “Pastry: Scalable, Decentralized Object Location, and Routing for Large-Scale Peer-to-Peer Systems”. Proceedings of the 18th IFIP/ACM International Conference on Distributed Systems Platforms (Middleware 2001). November 2001.Google Scholar

  • [22]

    Zhao, J. Kubiatowicz, and A. Joseph. Tapestry: An infrastructure for fault-tolerant wide-area location and routing. Technical Report UCB/CSD-01-1141, Computer Science Division, U. C. Berkeley, April 2001.Google Scholar

  • [23]

    Internet2 Netflow, Weekly Reports, Week of 20020826, August 2002

  • [24]

    Aiko Pras, “Measuring Traffic on the Internet”, IFIP WG6.7 Workshop and EUNICE Summer Scholl on Adaptable Networks and Teleservices, Norway, September 2002Google Scholar