130 likes | 286 Vues
Future Research Directions. Jennifer Rexford Advanced Computer Networks http://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/fall08/cos561/ Tuesdays/Thursdays 1:30pm-2:50pm. Tussles in Cyberspace. Internet Design Based on Common Goals. Original design of the Internet
E N D
Future Research Directions Jennifer Rexford Advanced Computer Networks http://www.cs.princeton.edu/courses/archive/fall08/cos561/ Tuesdays/Thursdays 1:30pm-2:50pm
Internet Design Based on Common Goals • Original design of the Internet • “Hook all the computers in the world together so that as yet unknown applications could be invented to run there.” • Today’s reality • “The Internet is not a single happy family of people dedicated to universal packet carriage. There is contention among the players.”
Stakeholders With Different Goals • Users running applications • Commercial providers making money • Governments enforcing laws • Intellectual property rights holders • Malicious parties who want to do harm • …
Contention (Tussle) Amongst the Parties • Single IP address vs. use of NATs • Property rights vs. P2P file sharing • Government wiretapping vs. encryption • Firewalls vs. tunneling, rerouting, port tricks • Robust, efficient routes vs. ISP competition • End-host congestion control vs. selfish users • …
Design for Tussle • Tussle in the Internet takes place at run time • Not primarily at design time (i.e., IETF) • Yet the design affects how tussle plays out • What each component is capable of doing • The boundaries between different components • Designing for tussle • Design for choice, for variation in outcome • Open interfaces; separation of policy and mechanism • Modularize the system along tussle boundaries • Bad: DNS names to name hosts and express trademark • Good: ToS bits separate application from service quality
Research Challenges • Improve system properties of the Internet • Reliability • Security • Managability • Scalability • Performance • Provide new features in the Internet • Mobility and disconnected operation • Interactive applications • Energy efficiency • Innovation inside the network
Tension Between Goals • Mobility vs. scalability • Location-independent addressing… • … vs. hierarchical addressing tied to routing • Reliability vs. affordability • Redundancy and avoiding shared risks… • … vs. co-location of nodes and links • Security vs. innovation • Limiting the power of the end system • … vs. programmability for new capabilities • Security vs. privacy • Self-certifying identifiers and attribution • … vs. anonymous communication
Areas That Interest Me • Network management • Protocols and monitoring for ease of management • Programmability inside the network • Enabling (rapid) innovation and customization • Network virtualization • Parallel virtual networks and new management apps • Incremental deployability • Backwards compatibility and economic incentives • Rigorous protocol design and analysis • Optimization theory as a way to “derive” protocols • Energy efficiency • Green networks and reducing energy at end hosts
Areas That Interest You? • What topics strike you as most important? • What research approaches seem most appropriate? • What are your thoughts on the collection of papers we read and discussed?
Conclusions • Tons of scope for interesting research • Intellectually fascinating in its own right • … and many connections to other disciplines • Practically relevant, with chance for real impact • Next and final class • Course project presentations (15 min each) • Thursday January 22 11:30am-1:30pm • Lunch provided!