No abstract

Abstract. Much of the existing work in peer to peer networking assumes that users will follow prescribed protocols without deviation. This assumption ignores the user's ability to modify the behavior of an algorithm for self-interested reasons. We advocate a different model in which peer to peer users are expected to be rational and self-interested. This model is found in the emergent fields of Algorithmic Mechanism Design (AMD) and Distributed Algorithmic Mechanism Design (DAMD), both of which introduce game-theoretic ideas into a computational system. We, as designers, must create systems (peer to peer search, routing, distributed auctions, resource allocation, etc.) that allow nodes to behave rationally while still achieving good overall system outcomes. This paper has three goals. The first is to convince the reader that rationality is a real issue in peer to peer networks. The second is to introduce mechanism design as a tool that can be used when designing networks with rational nodes. The third is to describe three open problems that are relevant in the peer to peer setting but are unsolved in existing AMD/DAMD work. In particular, we consider problems that arise when a networking infrastructure contains rational agents.

It is useful to prove that an implementation correctly follows a specification. But even with a provably correct implementation, given a choice, would a node choose to follow it? This paper explores how to create distributed system specifications that will be faithfully implemented in networks with rational nodes, so that no node will choose to deviate. Given a strategyproof centralized mechanism, and given a network of nodes modeled as having rational-manipulation faults, we provide a proof technique to establish the incentive-, communication-, and algorithm-compatibility properties that guarantee that participating nodes are faithful to a suggested specification. As a case study, we apply our methods to extend the strategyproof interdomain routing mechanism proposed by Feigenbaum, Papadimitriou, Sami, and Shenker (FPSS) [7], defining a faithful implementation.

Proving or disproving faithfulness (a property describing robustness to rational manipulation in action as well as information revelation) is an appealing goal when reasoning about distributed systems containing rational participants. Recent work formalizes the notion of faithfulness and its foundation properties, and presents a general proof technique in the course of proving the ex post Nash faithfulness of a theoretical routing problem [11].In this paper, we use a less formal approach and take some first steps in faithfulness analysis for existing algorithms running on the Internet. To this end, we consider the expected faithfulness of BitTorrent, a popular file download system, and show how manual backtracing (similar to the the ideas behind program slicing [22]) can be used to find rational manipulation problems. Although this primitive technique has serious drawbacks, it can be useful in disproving faithfulness.Building provably faithful Internet protocols and their corresponding specifications can be quite difficult depending on the system knowledge assumptions and problem complexity. We present some of the open problems that are associated with these challenges.

This paper introduces computation compatibility and communication compatibility as requirements for a distributed mechanism implementation. Just as payments are used to create incentive compatible mechanisms, some technique must be used to create computation/communication compatible mechanisms. This paper explores computation redundancy and communication redundancy as two such techniques. This paper uses interdomain routing as an example domain, and considers where redundancy can succeed and fail in addressing cheating with respect to computation and communication.