 2010/03/11
|
Last update 2001/06/25
 The Labs - Design & Functionality For The NetUNIX Clustering - Massive Networking
- Introduction
- Distributed Computation
- Distributed File Systems
- Clustering Resources
- PeerToPeer (P2P)
| Clustering1. Introduction
|
Will I Dream? - 2001 Odyssey
Clustering machines is the way increase performance, parallizing tasks and
distributing them over a cluster of machines.
| Clustering2. Distributed Computation
|
| PVMPVM (Parallel Virtual Machine) is a software system that enables a collection of heterogeneous computers to be used as a coherent and flexible concurrent computational resource. |
MPIMPI is the standard for multicomputer and cluster message passing introduced by the Message-Passing Interface Forum in April 1994. |
LAM/MPILAM (Local Area Multicomputer) is an MPI programming environment and development system for heterogeneous computers on a network. With LAM, a dedicated cluster or an existing network computing infrastructure can act as one parallel computer solving one problem. |
| GridWare by SunSolaris/Linux distributed computation |
OpenDirectory: Parallel ComputingGoogle Web-Directory |
| Clustering3. Distributed File Systems
|
| PVFSParallel Virtual File System (PVFS) Project for Linux |
GFSGlobal File System Project for Linux |
AFSIBM's open-source contribution (AIX, Linux, Solaris, NT) |
| ARLAFree reimplementation of AFS (*BSD, Linux, Solaris, Darwin) |
CODA File SystemAnother approach of distributed file-system (Linux, FreeBSD, NetBSD, Windows 95/NT) |
WebOSWebOS provides OS services to wide-area applications: resource discovery, a global namespace, remote process execution etc. |
| NFSLinux NFS How-To (NFS runs on most UNIX'es: man nfs or man nfsd) |
SGI: DCE/DCFDistributed Computing Environment/Filesystem (SGI only) |
| Clustering4. Clustering Resources
|
| Clustering5. PeerToPeer (P2P)
|
Introduction

| | P2P ("Peer to Peer") became another hype, Napster, GNUtella and other approaches
brought it exposure, yet, there is more than just trading MP3s and p0rn freely -
certainly P2P is a better use of the Internet than other more passive
approaches such as WWW - P2P works with the inherent potential of the Net:
Each node isn't just passive to download fancy webpages, but each
node becomes an active and full-sharing client in a broad web or network
implementing a higher functionality than each node alone could provide.
In a way, P2P is a step to an organic use of the Internet,
molecules operate as receivers and transmitters of information within
a body (Internet).
|
Resources

| |
|
Future Applications

| | P2P applications aren't yet many developed, there are many
possible where primary focus is massive distribution where no
central control is required or necessary:
- massive on-going computation, e.g. sharing program-code which
does computation and spreads info to nodes which take input to compute
further.
- massive distribution of code, like operating-system (e.g. new Linux dist),
check-sums very important otherwise hacked versions spread.
- ...
As mentioned, authentic data is crucial for serious P2P-applications,
this means data must be signed in order to be authentic, PGP or alike
two-key approachs are recommended.
One personal idea of mine was a small server-code which allows to
receive code which is also executed, the "P2P-Cell":
- large platform support: (Linux, *BSD, WinXX)
- running in secured environment and limited resources (memory,
diskspace, ports, bandwidth) - but otherwise able to anything
This would allow not just data but also code being distributed,
specially code which runs on every platform. Since I really dislike
Java, as this just doesn't convince, but some kind of binary format
which is platform independent and fast enough for real-life applications,
e.g. interpreter/compiler hybrid ala Java.
The result would be a massive distributed machine where everybody could
theoretically submit tasks which are executed within a range or limitations
each node has applied. Of course malicious code could target one single
node to spam with requests or connections, in order to avoid this
several precautions would be required to be taken:
- each code-base distributed must be authenticated, no anonymous
code is executed (or those who specifically allow it),
- each code must be connected to a user or user-group;
e.g. implementing groups, e.g. a group computing 10billions digits of
pi are responsible for such a piece of code submitted to the net.
- users could then either block a certain user or user-group from
connection or executing code.
In short, for this "CellP2P" follow aspects would be required to be considered:
- signing code
- authenticate users/nodes
- server code-base with ability to sanktion resources (memory, disk-space, bandwidth, executation-time)
- ability to get feedback on distribution of data/code (e.g. knowing
how many nodes actually execute the code, or received the data)
As result a basis for advanced P2P applications could be build without
having people upgrade the code-base all the time.
|
Reflection

| | As part of the distributed file-sharing, a predominant application of
the P2P as of 2001, the question of free sharing and economy arises:
compensation of the work of the creator of the content which is shared
freely. Right now, money as common denominator is the system to
measure contribution to the society, at least in theory or it was
meant to do so. In the time where stock-market and belief, or better
said, expectations rule the market, the solid values of economy
are virtualized, and P2P file-sharing is of the extreme: one
person shares a piece of art (picture, sound, movie) and it is
potentially available to everybody without central point of sharing,
exception at the first sharing.
Organic Life: No Single Point of Failure - or How Complexity is
Preserved - How Redundancy is used in order to Preserve Uniqueness.
When one looks at the way our DNA is shared, like something more
precious each cell contains the DNA, yet, the DNA itself is unique
in itself. The redundancy is used so the uniqueness and integrity is
maintained. P2P is just, in this consideration, the ability that
each molecule (node) is able to transmit or receive certain data,
e.g. the data itself could be a program for itself.
Now, the Internet with the existing approaches like ftp, www,
email covered functionality as provided by the Net, yet, the P2P
focuses on the equality of all nodes, each nodes is server and
client at the same time; there is no central point of failure,
and this part is something very useful to prevent data-losses,
means, this way you can store precious information.
P2P seems to me a speed up of what the Internet provided
already, we download content, programs and use and share it
further, the P2P applications allow now to speed up this
cycle, and this cycle determines also the kind data which is
preserved (and this would be an interesting sociological consideration
to look at).
In nature a complex strategy of recognition procedures
has been implemented in order to see which cells contain
malicious data (virus) and which don't, and cancer or viral
infections like AIDS have shown what happens when the cells
themselves are manipulated and their overall integrity of
the body is questioned, it can cause the death of the host.
Now, the overall intention or occurance of
such infection is part of the host's direction, means, the
cells reflect the intention of a higher order of will. In the
same way it could be reflected, that the higher order of
consciousness is directing the parts to connect each other
in a fashion in order to implement a functionality beyond
the comprehension of the parts themselves, like cells organize
in a higher order to compose organs or finally an entire human
body, in the same sense, all machines connecting together
and enhanced to potentially connect to each other implementing
a framework in which a higher order of intellectual potential,
or consciousness can be hosted . . .
|

Hipocrisy of the finest: "I agree that no single company can create all the hardware and software. Openness is central because it's the foundation of choice." -- Steve Balmer (Microsoft) blaming Apple regarding iPhone, February 18, 2009Last update 2001/06/25 
All Rights Reserved - (C) 1997 - 2009 by The Labs.Com |