A variety of new Internet architectures have been proposed over the past decade, often to explore a new feature such as improved security or content-based networking. Any new architecture must also address the critical issue of evolvability, since we can't hope to perfectly predict what services a future Internet will need. In this regard, IP has become a bottleneck for the current Internet, since it has proven extremely difficult to deploy even a single alternative such as IPv6 alongside it.
In a paper called HTTP as the Narrow Waist of the Future Internet, Popa et al. argue that HTTP could be the focus of evolvability for a new Internet architecture . Already HTTP is the protocol where new services are most rapidly being deployed, such as video streaming and web applications. The paper discusses the advantages of HTTP with respect to content-centric networking, middleboxes, and data mobility. In addition, the authors propose a new HTTP method that can be used to provide low latency services for VoIP, chat and other real-time applications. It is this extensibility that provides significant advantages for HTTP over IP as a key layer in a future Internet architecture.
The main idea of content-centric networking is that users access content via names (ESPN or "Daniel Zappala"), rather than hosts (espn.com or zappala.byu.edu). This allows the architecture to separate the name of content from its location, which could be a single server but could also be a set of content caches spread throughout the network. The authors argue that HTTP provides a very similar content-centric service, and that DNS can be adapted to allow for persistence, fast updates, and security that are required of a content-centric architecture. However, most content-centric architectures translate names into content-centric identifiers that are used for routing to a nearby copy, not location-centric IP addresses. The key question for me is whether content-centric routing offers significant benefits, given what DNS+HTTP already offers.
A key benefit of HTTP is its flexibility with regard to extensions and support of application-layer protocols. The authors make several weak arguments that this flexibility extends to network-layer services, such as multicast and anycast. For example, they claim the success of video distribution for the Olympics as evidence that HTTP can provide large scale single-source multicast, but I would argue that the key to making live events scale has been IP multicast to local caches. They also claim HTTP can use DNS anycasting, but don't offer any details or comparison to content-centric routing based on anycast.
The main contribution of the paper is the design of a new method for HTTP that allows it to support push-oriented datagram services such as VoIP and other real-time applications. The basic idea is that a client sends an S-GET request for a URI to the server, which stores it and streams all new content for the URI to the client. Push technologies have been around for a long time, and one known as Server-Sent events has been around since it was implemented by Opera in 2006 and is now being standardized for HTML5. It's disappointing this wasn't discussed by the authors.
The authors acknowledge several other weaknesses of HTTP with respect to an improved Internet architecture: it has limited support for QoS guarantees, is vulnerable to network-layer DoS attacks, has poor naming persistence, and has higher overhead than IP. With improving bandwidth and the use of DASH for video, I am less concerned with QoS support, but these other weaknesses are significant and are left for future work.
|||Lucian Popa, Ali Ghodsi, and Ion Stoica. 2010. HTTP as the narrow waist of the future internet. In Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGCOMM Workshop on Hot Topics in Networks (Hotnets-IX). ACM, New York, NY, USA, , Article 6 , 6 pages. DOI=10.1145/1868447.1868453 http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1868447.1868453|