FYP: Peer-to-Peer Communications Framework on Android Platform
- 1. P2P Communication Framework on Android Platform By Liu Tianwei
- 2. Outline • Introduction • Motivation + Proposed Solutions. • Recap of work done • Design Decision and Limitation • Implementation result and performance • Demo • Limitation and Future Work
- 3. Introduction
- 4. Problem • Need for better mobile network infrastructure. • Traditional Mobile Network are not designed to scale fast and cheaply.
- 5. Motivation • Provide an alternatives to traditional mobile network infrastructure. • Lower the infrastructure cost for each additional devices added to the network.
- 6. Propose Solution • A P2P communication framework on mobile platform. • Open Source to allow developers to easily integrate with their existing source code.
- 8. Recap of work done • Server Implementation • Literature Reviews • Geoscribe Webservice implementation
- 9. Design Decisions and Limitations • Platform • Hardware Choices and Limitation • Network Design • AutoConnection
- 10. Platform • Open Source • Large Developer Community • Comprehensive Java Apis.
- 11. Network Design Designed Considered: • Centralized Index • Gnutella (Query Flooding) • Hierarchical Overlay • Distributed Hash Table
- 13. Gnutella
- 15. Distributed Hash Table • A distributed database over large number of peers that supported query&update operations. • Information stored in database in the form of key value pairs. • Peers query database with key
- 16. Network Design Modified Gnutella network. • Easy to implement. • Bluetooth hardware limitations. • Server-less implementation.
- 17. Hardware Choices and Limitations Androids Offers: • Bluetooth • Wireless - Fidelity
- 18. Bluetooth
- 19. Bluetooth
- 20. Bluetooth
- 21. Bluetooth
- 22. Bluetooth
- 23. Wireless Fidelity • IEEE 802.11 Standard (b/g/n) • via router • Direct device to device (ad-hoc)
- 24. Hardware Choices and Limitations Focused on Bluetooth • Bluetooth has well defined apis • Wi-Fi ad-hoc mode not supported on android. • rooting is required for Wi-Fi ad-hoc.
- 25. Hardware Choices and Limitations
- 26. Hardware Choices and Limitations
- 27. AutoConnection • Experimental feature to overcome in-ability to stay always discoverable. • Centralized Geo-location indexing server. • Maintain Bluetooth scatter-net topology.
- 28. Implementation Result and Performance • Framework Overview • Key Features • Performance Metrics
- 30. Framework Overview Android Interface Definition Language(AIDL)
- 31. Framework Overview Use Cases: • Ad-hoc gaming network • Instant Messaging Application • File Sharing • Video Sharing • Internet sharing • Geo-location Triangulations, etcs
- 32. Key Features • Open-Source • No Rooting Required • Packet Routing • No need for Centralized Index Server • Flow Control / Traffic Policing • Auto Connections
- 33. Performance Metrics Average Maximum throughput : 54Kbps 324#565'789)6:8-6$' +!" *!" )!" (!" '!" !"#$%&%' &!" %!" $!" #!" !" !" !,'" #" #,'" $" $,'" %" %,'" &" &,'" ()*')+',)-'$)'./%0120)1'
- 34. Demo
- 35. Limitations of Framework • Bluetooth chipset on Androids phones. • Pairing between devices • Lack of security • Dependency on Geo-Location Indexing Server(AutoConnection)
- 36. Future works • Wi-Fi Ad-hoc communication. • Server-less implementation • Optimization • Security
- 37. Q&A
Editor's Notes
- #2: \n
- #3: \n
- #4: In a recent report by Nielsen, smartphone penetration rate in US is predicted to reach over 50% reaching over 95 millions units in the 2011(Nielsen 2011). A smartphone, is defined here as a mobile phone “that offers more advanced computing ability and connectivity than a contemporary feature phone”(Nusca 2009)\n
- #5: \n
- #6: \n
- #7: \n
- #8: \n
- #9: \n
- #10: \n
- #11: \n
- #12: \n
- #13: \n
- #14: \n
- #15: \n
- #16: \n
- #17: \n
- #18: \n
- #19: \n
- #20: \n
- #21: \n
- #22: \n
- #23: \n
- #24: \n
- #25: \n
- #26: \n
- #27: \n
- #28: \n
- #29: A open source peer to peer framework which allow for inter-connectivity between devices.\n
- #30: \n
- #31: \n
- #32: \n
- #33: According to the experimental measurements obtained from the transferring of multiple Image files of 350 - 380 kbytes, we observed that the throughput rate stabilizes at around 54Kbits/s for nodes that are more than 1 mores away from the original node.\n
- #34: \n
- #35: \n
- #36: \n
- #37: \n