Web content providers and content distribution network (CDN) operators often set up mirrors of popular content to improve performance. Due to the scale and decentralized administration of the Internet, companies have a limited number of sites (relative to the size of the Internet) where they can place mirrors. We formalize the mirror placement problem as a case of constrained mirror placement, where mirrors can only be placed on a preselected set of candidates. We study performance improvement in terms of client round-trip time (RTT) and server load when clients are clustered by the autonomous systems (AS) in which they reside. Our results show that, regardless of the mirror placement algorithm used, for only a surprisingly small range of values there is an increase in the number of mirror sites (under the constraint) effective in reducing the client to server RTT and server load. In this range, we show that greedy placement performs the best.

Internet service providers and infrastructural companies often employ mirrors of popular content to decrease client download time and server load. Due to the immense scale of the Internet and decentralized administration of the networks, companies have a limited number of sites (relative to the size of the Internet) where they can place mirrors. Mirrors of popular content are usually replicated on every site to maximize reachability to clients. We study the performance improvements as the number of mirrors increases under different placement algorithms subject to the constraint that mirrors can be placed only at certain locations. Although there are extensive theoretical studies on center placement and, analytical and empirical studies on Web cache placement, we are not aware of any published literature on mirror placement especially in the case of constrained mirror placement. Our results show that increasing the number of mirror sites under the constraint is effective in reducing client download time and reducing server load only for a surprisingly small range of values regardless of the mirror placement algorithm.