Abstract

The routing tables of Distributed Hash Tables (DHTs) can vary from size O(1) to O(n). Currently, what is lacking is an analytic framework to suggest the optimal routing table size for a given workload. This paper (1) compares DHTs with O(1) to O(n) routing tables and identifies some good design points; and (2) proposes protocols to realize the potential of those good design points. We use total traffic as the uniform metric to compare heterogeneous DHTs and emphasize the balance between maintenance cost and lookup cost. Assuming a node on average processes 1,000 or more lookups during its entire lifetime, our analysis shows that large routing tables actually lead to both low traffic and low lookup hops. These good design points translate into one-hop routing for systems of medium size and two-hop routing for large systems. Existing one-hop or two-hop protocols are based on a hierarchy. We instead demonstrate that it is possible to achieve completely decentralized one-hop or two-hop routing, i.e., without giving up being peer-to-peer. We propose 1h-Calot for one-hop routing and 2h-Calot for two-hop routing. Assuming a moderate lookup rate, compared with DHTs that use O(log n) routing tables, 1h-Calot and 2h-Calot save traffic by up to 70 % while resolving lookups in one or two hops as opposed to O(log n) hops.

Citations