Archive for the ‘information-centric networking’ tag
Secure Web Objects: Building Blocks for Metaverse Interoperability and Decentralization
In our upcoming paper at IEEE Metacom-2024, we propose a data-oriented approach for future Web and Metaverse system designs.
Abstract
This position paper explores how to support the Web's evolution through an underlying data-centric approach that better matches the data-orientedness of modern and emerging applications. We revisit the original vision of the Web as a hypermedia system that supports document composability and application interoperability via name-based data access. We propose the use of secure web objects (SWO), a data-oriented communication approach that can reduce complexity, centrality, and inefficiency, particularly for collaborative and local-first applications, such as the Metaverse and other collaborative applications. SWO are named, signed, application-defined objects that are secured independently of their containers or communications channels, an approach that leverages the results from over a decade-long data-centric networking research. This approach does not require intermediation by aggregators of identity, storage, and other services that are common today. We present a brief design overview, illustrated through prototypes for two editors of shared hypermedia documents: one for 3D and one for LaTeX. We also discuss our findings and suggest a roadmap for future research.
References
-
Tianyuan Yu, Xinyu Ma, Varun Patil, Yekta Kocaogullar, Yulong Zhang, Jeff Burke, Dirk Kutscher, Lixia Zhang; Secure Web Objects: Building Blocks for Metaverse Interoperability and Decentralization; IEEE MetaCom 2024, pre-print: https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.15221
-
Dirk Kutscher; Data-oriented, Decentralized, Daring: Opportunities and Research Challenges for an Information-Centric Web; Lightning Talk at NDNComm 2024; March 2024
-
Navin V. Keizer, Onur Ascigil, Michał Król, Dirk Kutscher, and George Pavlou; A Survey on Content Retrieval on the Decentralised Web; ACM Computing Surveys; March 2024; https://doi.org/10.1145/3649132
-
Dirk Kutscher, Jeff Burke, Giuseppe Fioccola, Paulo Mendes;
Statement: The Metaverse as an Information-Centric Network; 10th ACM Conference on Information-Centric Networking (ACM ICN '23); October 9 — 10, 2023, Reykjavik, Iceland; https://doi.org/10.1145/3623565.3623761
Networked Systems for Distributed Machine Learning at Scale
On July 3rd, 2024, I gave a talk at the UCL/Huawei Joint Lab Workshop on "Building Better Protocols for Future Smart Networks" that took place on UCL's campus in London.
Talk Abstract
Large-scale distributed machine learning training networks are increasingly facing scaling problems with respect to FLOPS per deployed compute node. Communication bottlenecks can inhibit the effective utilization of expensive GPU resources. The root cause of these performance problems is not insufficient transmission speed or slow servers; it is the structure of the distributed computing and the communication characteristics it incurs. Large machine learning workloads typically provide relatively asymmetric, and sometimes centralized, communication structures, such as gradient aggregation and model update distribution. Even when training networks are less centralized, the amount of data that needs to be sent to aggregate several thousand input values through collective communication functions such as AllReduce can lead to Incast problems that overload network resources and servers. This talk discusses challenges and opportunities for developing in-network aggregation systems from a distributed computing and networked systems perspective.
Network Abstractions for Continuous Innovation
In a joint panel at ACM ICN-2023 and IEEE ICNP-2023 in Reykjavik, Ken Calvert, Jim Kurose, Lixia Zhang, and myself discussed future network abstractions. The panel was moderated by Dave Oran. This was one of the more interesting and interactive panel sessions I participated in, so I am providing a summary here.
Since the Internet's initial rollout ~40 years ago, not only its global connectivity has brought fundamental changes to society and daily life, but its protocol suite and implementations have also gone through many iterations of changes, with SDN, NFV, and programmability among other changes over the last decade. This panel looks into next decade of network research by asking a set of questions regarding where lies the future direction to enable continued innovations.
Opportunities and Challenges for Future Network Innovations
Lixia Zhang: Rethinking Internet Architecture Fundamentals
Lixia Zhang (UCLA), quoting Einstein, said that the formulation of the problem is often more essential than the solution and pointed at the complexities of today's protocols stacks that are apparently needed to achieve desired functionality. For example, Lixia mentioned RFC 9298 on proxying UDP in HTTP, specifically on tunneling UDP to a server acting as a UDP-specific proxy over HTTP. UDP over IP was once conceived as a minial message-oriented communication service that was intended for DNS and interactive real-time communication. Due to its push-based communication model, it can be used with minimal effort for useful but also harmful application, including large-scale DDOS attacks. Proxing UDP over HTTP addresses this and other concerns, by providing a secure channel to a server in a web context, so that the server can authorize tunnel endpoints, and so that the UDP communication is congestion controlled by the underlying transport protocol (TCP or QUIC). This specification can be seen as a work-around: sending unsolicted (and un-authenticated) messages over the Internet is a major problem in today's Internet. There is no general approach for authenticating such messages and no concept for trust in peer identities. Instead of analyzing the root cause of such problems, the Internet communities (and the dominant players in that space) prefer to come up with (highly inefficient) workarounds.
This problem was discussed more generally by Oliver Spatscheck of AT&T Labs in his 2013 article titled Layers of Success, where he discussed the (actually deployed) excessive layering in production networks, for example mobile communication networks, where regular Internet traffic is routinely tunneled over GTP/UDP/IP/MPLS:
The main issue with layering is that layers hide information from each other. We could see this as a benefit, because it reduces the complexities involved in adding more layers, thus reducing the cost of introducing more services. However, hiding information can lead to complex and dynamic layer interactions that hamper the end-to-end system’s reliability and are extremely difficult if not impossible to debug and operate. So, much of the savings achieved when introducing new services is being spent operating them reliably.
According to Lixia, the excessive layering stems from more fundamental problems with today's network architecture, notably the lack of identity and trust in the core Internet protocols and the lack of functionality in the forwarding system – leading to significant problems today as exemplied by recent DDoS attacks. Quoting Einstein again, she said that we cannot solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them, calling for a more fundamental redesign based on information-centric networking principles.
Ken Calvert: Domain-specific Networking
Ken Calvert (University of Kentucky) provided a retrospective of networking research and looked at selected papers published at the first IEEE ICNP conference in 1993. According to Ken, the dominant theme at that time was How to design, build, and analyze protocols, for example as discussed in his 1993 ICNP paper titled Beyond layering: modularity considerations for protocol architectures.
Ken offered a set of challenges and opportunities for future networking research, such as:
- Domain-specific networking à la Ex uno pluria, a 2018 CCR editorial discussing:
- infrastructure ossification;
- lack of service innovation; and
- a fragmentation into "ManyNets" that could re-create a service-infrastructure innovation cycle.
- Incentives and "money flow"
- Can we escape from the advertising-driven Internet app ecosystem? Should we?
- Wide-area multicast (many-many) service
- Building block for building distributed applications?
- Inter-AS trust relationships
- Ossification of the Inter-AS interface – cannot be solved by a protocol!
- Impact ⇐ Applications ⇐ Business opportunities ($)
- What user problem cannot be solved today?
- "The core challenge of CS ... is a conceptual one, viz., what (abstract) mechanisms we can conceive without getting lost in the complexities of our own making." - Dijkstra
For his vision for networking in 30 years, Ken suggested that:
- IP addresses will still be in use
- but visible only at interfaces between different owners' infrastructures
- Network infrastructure might consist of access ASes + separate core networks operated by the "Big Five".
- Users might communicate via direct brain interfaces with AI systems.
Dirk Kutscher: Principled Approach to Network Programmability
I offered the perspective of introducing a principled approach to programmability that could provide better programmability (for humans and AI), based on more powerful network abstractions.
Previous work in SDN with protocols such as OpenFlow and dataplane programming languages such as P4 have only scratched the surface of what could be possible. OpenFlow was a great first idea, but it was fundamentally constrained by the IP and Ethernet-based abstractions that were built into it. It can be used for programming some applications in that domain, such as firewalls, virtual networking etc., but the idea of continuous innovation has not really materialized.
Similarly, P4 was advertized as an enabler for new levels of dataplane programmability, but even simple systems such as NetCache have to go to quite some extend to achieve minimal functionality for a proof-of-concept. Another P4 problem that is often reported is the hardware heterogeneity so that universal programmability is not really possible. In my opinion, this raises some questions with respect to applicability of current dataplane programming for in-network computing. A good example of a more productive application of P4 is the recent SIGCOMM paper on NetClone that describes as fast, scalable, and dynamic request cloning for microsecond-Scale RPCs. Here P4 is used as an accelerator for programming relatively simple functionality (protocol parsing, forwarding).
This may not be enough for future universal programmability though. During the panel discussion, I drew an analogy to computer programming language. We are not seeing the first programming language and IDEs that are designed from the ground up for better AI. What would that mean for network programmability? What abstractions and APIs would we need?
In my opinion, we would have to take a step back and think about the intended functionality and the required observability for future (automated) network programmability that is really protocol-independent. This would then entail more work on:
- the fundamental forwarding service (informed by hardware constraints);
- the telemetry approach;
- suitable protocol semantics;
- APIs for applications and management; and
- new network emulation & debugging approach (a long the lines of "network digital twin" concepts).
Overall, I am expecting new exiciting research in the direction of principled approaches to network programmability.
Jim Kurose: Open Research Infrastructures and Softwarization
Jim reminded us that the key reason Internet research flourished was the availability of open infrastructure with no incumbent providers initially. The infrastructure was owned by researchers, labs, and universities and allowed for a lot of experimentation.
This open infrastructure has recently been challenged by ossification with the rise of production ISP services at scale, and the emergence of closed ISPs, cellular carriers, hyperscalers operating large portion of the network.
As an example for emerging environments that offer interesting opportunities for experiments and new developments, Jim mentioned 4G/5G private networks, i.e., licensed spectrum created closed ecosystems – but open to researchers, creating opportunities for:
- innovation in private 5G networks such as Citizens Broadband Radio Service (CBRS) that could enables innovation in open, deployed systems and a democratization of 5G+ networks and edge applications;
- testbeds, such as Platforms for Advanced Wireless Research (PAWR); and
- the integration of WiFi, 5G as link-layer edge RANs.
Jim was also suggesting further opportunities in softwarization and programmability, such as (formal) methods for logical correctness and configuration management, as well as programmability to add services beyond the "minimal viable service", such as closed loop automatic control and management.
Finally Jim also mentioned opportunities in emerging new networks such as LEOs, IoT and home networks.
Named Data Microverse
Our project proposal on Named Data Microverse was selected as a winner of the Future of Data Challenge
The Named Data Microverse project explores how Information-Centric Networking (ICN) can enable a free, open and decentralized approach to “the metaverse”. The project aims to balances scalability and market-based innovation with democratization, trustworthiness, and equitable empowerment of individuals. ICN provides an architectural foundation for secure, distributed applications to be created more easily and provides resilience in natural disasters, better mobility support, cloud-optional local communication, improved privacy, and other benefits that are not addressed solely by “Web3” technologies.
This is a joint project with Jeff Burke and Lixia Zhang at UCLA.
URIs for Named Information
URIs [RFC3986] are used in various protocols for identifying resources. In many deployments those URIs contain strings that are hash function outputs in order to ensure uniqueness in terms of mapping the URI to a specific resource, or to make URIs hard to guess for security reasons. However, there is no standard way to interpret those strings and so today in general only the creator of the URI knows how to use the hash function output.
In the context of information-centric networking and elsewhere there is value in being able to compare a presented resource against the URI that was de-referenced in order to access that resource. If a cryptographically-strong comparison function can be used then this allows for many forms of in-network storage, without requiring as much trust in the infrastructure used to present the resource. The outputs of hash functions can be used in this manner, if presented in a standard way. There are also many other potential uses for these hash outputs, for example, in terms of binding the URI to an owner via signatures and public keys, mapping between names, handling versioning etc. Many such uses can be based on "wrapping" the object with meta-data, e.g. including signatures, public key certificates etc.
We therefore define the "ni" URI scheme that allows for, but does not insist upon, checking of the integrity of the URI/resource mapping.
The "ni" URI scheme is specified in draft-farrell-ni-00
Towards an Information-Centric Internet with more Things
The Internet is already made of things. However, we expect there
to be many more less-capable things, such as sensors and
actuators, connected to the Internet in years to come. In
parallel, Internet applications are more and more being used to
perform operations on named (information) objects, and various
Information-Centric Networking (ICN) approaches are being
researched in order to allow such applications to work
effectively at scale and with various forms of mobility and in
networking environments that are more challenging than a
traditional access network and data center. In a recent position
paper, we outline some benefits that may accrue, and issues that
arise, should the Internet, with many more things, make use of
the ICN approach to networking and we argue that ICN concepts
should be considered when planning for increases in the number of
things connected to the Internet.
Venue: Interconnecting Smart Objects with the Internet Workshop Prague, Friday, 25th March 2011
Paper: http://www.iab.org/about/workshops/smartobjects/papers/Kutscher.pdf
Presentation: http://www.iab.org/about/workshops/smartobjects/slides/Kutscher.pdf
Mailing List for Information-Centric Networking Discussion
Following up on the December 2010 Dagstuhl seminar on ICN, we have set up a mailing for general ICN-related discussion. If you are interested to join, please sign up here.
Dagstuhl ICN Seminar Proceedings Published
The proceedings of our 2010 Dagstuhl seminar on Information-Centric Networking have been published.
They are available online: [2010 Dagstuhl ICN seminar proceedings]
Workshop on Information-Centric Networking and Applications
I am co-organizing a Workshop on Information-Centric Networking and Applications.
ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Information-Centric Networking
I am co-organizing the 2011 ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Information-Centric Networking.