fbpx
Wikipedia

Peer-to-peer

January 13, 2023

For other uses, see Peer-to-peer (disambiguation), Point-to-point (disambiguation), and P2P (disambiguation).

Peer-to-peer (P2P) computing or networking is a distributed application architecture that partitions tasks or workloads between peers. Peers are equally privileged, equipotent participants in the network. They are said to form a peer-to-peer network of nodes.[1]

A peer-to-peer (P2P) network in which interconnected nodes ("peers") share resources amongst each other without the use of a centralized administrative system
A network based on the client–server model, where individual clients request services and resources from centralized servers

Peers make a portion of their resources, such as processing power, disk storage or network bandwidth, directly available to other network participants, without the need for central coordination by servers or stable hosts.[2] Peers are both suppliers and consumers of resources, in contrast to the traditional client–server model in which the consumption and supply of resources are divided.[3]

While P2P systems had previously been used in many application domains,[4] the architecture was popularized by the file sharing system Napster, originally released in 1999.[5] The concept has inspired new structures and philosophies in many areas of human interaction. In such social contexts, peer-to-peer as a meme refers to the egalitarian social networking that has emerged throughout society, enabled by Internet technologies in general.

Historical development

 
SETI@home was established in 1999

While P2P systems had previously been used in many application domains,[4] the concept was popularized by file sharing systems such as the music-sharing application Napster (originally released in 1999). The peer-to-peer movement allowed millions of Internet users to connect "directly, forming groups and collaborating to become user-created search engines, virtual supercomputers, and filesystems."[6] The basic concept of peer-to-peer computing was envisioned in earlier software systems and networking discussions, reaching back to principles stated in the first Request for Comments, RFC 1.[7]

Tim Berners-Lee's vision for the World Wide Web was close to a P2P network in that it assumed each user of the web would be an active editor and contributor, creating and linking content to form an interlinked "web" of links. The early Internet was more open than the present day, where two machines connected to the Internet could send packets to each other without firewalls and other security measures.[6][page needed] This contrasts to the broadcasting-like structure of the web as it has developed over the years.[8][9][10] As a precursor to the Internet, ARPANET was a successful client-server network where "every participating node could request and serve content." However, ARPANET was not self-organized, and it lacked the ability to "provide any means for context or content-based routing beyond 'simple' address-based routing."[10]

Therefore, Usenet, a distributed messaging system that is often described as an early peer-to-peer architecture, was established. It was developed in 1979 as a system that enforces a decentralized model of control.[11] The basic model is a client–server model from the user or client perspective that offers a self-organizing approach to newsgroup servers. However, news servers communicate with one another as peers to propagate Usenet news articles over the entire group of network servers. The same consideration applies to SMTP email in the sense that the core email-relaying network of mail transfer agents has a peer-to-peer character, while the periphery of Email clients and their direct connections is strictly a client-server relationship.[citation needed]

In May 1999, with millions more people on the Internet, Shawn Fanning introduced the music and file-sharing application called Napster.[10] Napster was the beginning of peer-to-peer networks, as we know them today, where "participating users establish a virtual network, entirely independent from the physical network, without having to obey any administrative authorities or restrictions."[10]

Architecture

A peer-to-peer network is designed around the notion of equal peer nodes simultaneously functioning as both "clients" and "servers" to the other nodes on the network. This model of network arrangement differs from the client–server model where communication is usually to and from a central server. A typical example of a file transfer that uses the client-server model is the File Transfer Protocol (FTP) service in which the client and server programs are distinct: the clients initiate the transfer, and the servers satisfy these requests.

Routing and resource discovery

Peer-to-peer networks generally implement some form of virtual overlay network on top of the physical network topology, where the nodes in the overlay form a subset of the nodes in the physical network. Data is still exchanged directly over the underlying TCP/IP network, but at the application layer peers are able to communicate with each other directly, via the logical overlay links (each of which corresponds to a path through the underlying physical network). Overlays are used for indexing and peer discovery, and make the P2P system independent from the physical network topology. Based on how the nodes are linked to each other within the overlay network, and how resources are indexed and located, we can classify networks as unstructured or structured (or as a hybrid between the two).[12][13][14]

Unstructured networks

 
Overlay network diagram for an unstructured P2P network, illustrating the ad hoc nature of the connections between nodes

Unstructured peer-to-peer networks do not impose a particular structure on the overlay network by design, but rather are formed by nodes that randomly form connections to each other.[15] (Gnutella, Gossip, and Kazaa are examples of unstructured P2P protocols).[16]

Because there is no structure globally imposed upon them, unstructured networks are easy to build and allow for localized optimizations to different regions of the overlay.[17] Also, because the role of all peers in the network is the same, unstructured networks are highly robust in the face of high rates of "churn"—that is, when large numbers of peers are frequently joining and leaving the network.[18][19]

However, the primary limitations of unstructured networks also arise from this lack of structure. In particular, when a peer wants to find a desired piece of data in the network, the search query must be flooded through the network to find as many peers as possible that share the data. Flooding causes a very high amount of signaling traffic in the network, uses more CPU/memory (by requiring every peer to process all search queries), and does not ensure that search queries will always be resolved. Furthermore, since there is no correlation between a peer and the content managed by it, there is no guarantee that flooding will find a peer that has the desired data. Popular content is likely to be available at several peers and any peer searching for it is likely to find the same thing. But if a peer is looking for rare data shared by only a few other peers, then it is highly unlikely that search will be successful.[20]

Structured networks

 
Overlay network diagram for a structured P2P network, using a distributed hash table (DHT) to identify and locate nodes/resources

In structured peer-to-peer networks the overlay is organized into a specific topology, and the protocol ensures that any node can efficiently[21] search the network for a file/resource, even if the resource is extremely rare.

The most common type of structured P2P networks implement a distributed hash table (DHT),[22][23] in which a variant of consistent hashing is used to assign ownership of each file to a particular peer.[24][25] This enables peers to search for resources on the network using a hash table: that is, (key, value) pairs are stored in the DHT, and any participating node can efficiently retrieve the value associated with a given key.[26][27]

 
Distributed hash tables

However, in order to route traffic efficiently through the network, nodes in a structured overlay must maintain lists of neighbors[28] that satisfy specific criteria. This makes them less robust in networks with a high rate of churn (i.e. with large numbers of nodes frequently joining and leaving the network).[19][29] More recent evaluation of P2P resource discovery solutions under real workloads have pointed out several issues in DHT-based solutions such as high cost of advertising/discovering resources and static and dynamic load imbalance.[30]

Notable distributed networks that use DHTs include Tixati, an alternative to BitTorrent's distributed tracker, the Kad network, the Storm botnet, and the YaCy. Some prominent research projects include the Chord project, Kademlia, PAST storage utility, P-Grid, a self-organized and emerging overlay network, and CoopNet content distribution system.[31] DHT-based networks have also been widely utilized for accomplishing efficient resource discovery[32][33] for grid computing systems, as it aids in resource management and scheduling of applications.

Hybrid models

Hybrid models are a combination of peer-to-peer and client–server models.[34] A common hybrid model is to have a central server that helps peers find each other. Spotify was an example of a hybrid model [until 2014]. There are a variety of hybrid models, all of which make trade-offs between the centralized functionality provided by a structured server/client network and the node equality afforded by the pure peer-to-peer unstructured networks. Currently, hybrid models have better performance than either pure unstructured networks or pure structured networks because certain functions, such as searching, do require a centralized functionality but benefit from the decentralized aggregation of nodes provided by unstructured networks.[35]

CoopNet content distribution system

CoopNet (Cooperative Networking) was a proposed system for off-loading serving to peers who have recently downloaded content, proposed by computer scientists Venkata N. Padmanabhan and Kunwadee Sripanidkulchai, working at Microsoft Research and Carnegie Mellon University.[36][37] When a server experiences an increase in load it redirects incoming peers to other peers who have agreed to mirror the content, thus off-loading balance from the server. All of the information is retained at the server. This system makes use of the fact that the bottle-neck is most likely in the outgoing bandwidth than the CPU, hence its server-centric design. It assigns peers to other peers who are 'close in IP' to its neighbors [same prefix range] in an attempt to use locality. If multiple peers are found with the same file it designates that the node choose the fastest of its neighbors. Streaming media is transmitted by having clients cache the previous stream, and then transmit it piece-wise to new nodes.

Security and trust

Peer-to-peer systems pose unique challenges from a computer security perspective.

Like any other form of software, P2P applications can contain vulnerabilities. What makes this particularly dangerous for P2P software, however, is that peer-to-peer applications act as servers as well as clients, meaning that they can be more vulnerable to remote exploits.[38]

Routing attacks

Since each node plays a role in routing traffic through the network, malicious users can perform a variety of "routing attacks", or denial of service attacks. Examples of common routing attacks include "incorrect lookup routing" whereby malicious nodes deliberately forward requests incorrectly or return false results, "incorrect routing updates" where malicious nodes corrupt the routing tables of neighboring nodes by sending them false information, and "incorrect routing network partition" where when new nodes are joining they bootstrap via a malicious node, which places the new node in a partition of the network that is populated by other malicious nodes.[39]

Corrupted data and malware

See also: Data validation and Malware

The prevalence of malware varies between different peer-to-peer protocols. Studies analyzing the spread of malware on P2P networks found, for example, that 63% of the answered download requests on the gnutella network contained some form of malware, whereas only 3% of the content on OpenFT contained malware. In both cases, the top three most common types of malware accounted for the large majority of cases (99% in gnutella, and 65% in OpenFT). Another study analyzing traffic on the Kazaa network found that 15% of the 500,000 file sample taken were infected by one or more of the 365 different computer viruses that were tested for.[40]

Corrupted data can also be distributed on P2P networks by modifying files that are already being shared on the network. For example, on the FastTrack network, the RIAA managed to introduce faked chunks into downloads and downloaded files (mostly MP3 files). Files infected with the RIAA virus were unusable afterwards and contained malicious code. The RIAA is also known to have uploaded fake music and movies to P2P networks in order to deter illegal file sharing.[41] Consequently, the P2P networks of today have seen an enormous increase of their security and file verification mechanisms. Modern hashing, chunk verification and different encryption methods have made most networks resistant to almost any type of attack, even when major parts of the respective network have been replaced by faked or nonfunctional hosts.[42]

Resilient and scalable computer networks

See also: Wireless mesh network and Distributed computing

The decentralized nature of P2P networks increases robustness because it removes the single point of failure that can be inherent in a client–server based system.[43] As nodes arrive and demand on the system increases, the total capacity of the system also increases, and the likelihood of failure decreases. If one peer on the network fails to function properly, the whole network is not compromised or damaged. In contrast, in a typical client–server architecture, clients share only their demands with the system, but not their resources. In this case, as more clients join the system, fewer resources are available to serve each client, and if the central server fails, the entire network is taken down.

Distributed storage and search

 
Search results for the query "software libre", using YaCy a free distributed search engine that runs on a peer-to-peer network instead of making requests to centralized index servers (like Google, Yahoo, and other corporate search engines)

There are both advantages and disadvantages in P2P networks related to the topic of data backup, recovery, and availability. In a centralized network, the system administrators are the only forces controlling the availability of files being shared. If the administrators decide to no longer distribute a file, they simply have to remove it from their servers, and it will no longer be available to users. Along with leaving the users powerless in deciding what is distributed throughout the community, this makes the entire system vulnerable to threats and requests from the government and other large forces. For example, YouTube has been pressured by the RIAA, MPAA, and entertainment industry to filter out copyrighted content. Although server-client networks are able to monitor and manage content availability, they can have more stability in the availability of the content they choose to host. A client should not have trouble accessing obscure content that is being shared on a stable centralized network. P2P networks, however, are more unreliable in sharing unpopular files because sharing files in a P2P network requires that at least one node in the network has the requested data, and that node must be able to connect to the node requesting the data. This requirement is occasionally hard to meet because users may delete or stop sharing data at any point.[44]

In this sense, the community of users in a P2P network is completely responsible for deciding what content is available. Unpopular files will eventually disappear and become unavailable as more people stop sharing them. Popular files, however, will be highly and easily distributed. Popular files on a P2P network actually have more stability and availability than files on central networks. In a centralized network, a simple loss of connection between the server and clients is enough to cause a failure, but in P2P networks, the connections between every node must be lost in order to cause a data sharing failure. In a centralized system, the administrators are responsible for all data recovery and backups, while in P2P systems, each node requires its own backup system. Because of the lack of central authority in P2P networks, forces such as the recording industry, RIAA, MPAA, and the government are unable to delete or stop the sharing of content on P2P systems.[45]

Applications

Content delivery

In P2P networks, clients both provide and use resources. This means that unlike client–server systems, the content-serving capacity of peer-to-peer networks can actually increase as more users begin to access the content (especially with protocols such as Bittorrent that require users to share, refer a performance measurement study[46]). This property is one of the major advantages of using P2P networks because it makes the setup and running costs very small for the original content distributor.[47][48]

File-sharing networks

Many peer-to-peer file sharing networks, such as Gnutella, G2, and the eDonkey network popularized peer-to-peer technologies.

Copyright infringements

Peer-to-peer networking involves data transfer from one user to another without using an intermediate server. Companies developing P2P applications have been involved in numerous legal cases, primarily in the United States, over conflicts with copyright law.[50] Two major cases are Grokster vs RIAA and MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd..[51] In the last case, the Court unanimously held that defendant peer-to-peer file sharing companies Grokster and Streamcast could be sued for inducing copyright infringement.

Multimedia

  • The P2PTV and PDTP protocols.
  • Some proprietary multimedia applications use a peer-to-peer network along with streaming servers to stream audio and video to their clients.
  • Peercasting for multicasting streams.
  • Pennsylvania State University, MIT and Simon Fraser University are carrying on a project called LionShare designed for facilitating file sharing among educational institutions globally.
  • Osiris is a program that allows its users to create anonymous and autonomous web portals distributed via P2P network.

Other P2P applications

 
Torrent file connect peers

Social implications

See also: Social peer-to-peer processes

Incentivizing resource sharing and cooperation

 
The BitTorrent protocol: In this animation, the colored bars beneath all of the 7 clients in the upper region above represent the file being shared, with each color representing an individual piece of the file. After the initial pieces transfer from the seed (large system at the bottom), the pieces are individually transferred from client to client. The original seeder only needs to send out one copy of the file for all the clients to receive a copy.

Cooperation among a community of participants is key to the continued success of P2P systems aimed at casual human users; these reach their full potential only when large numbers of nodes contribute resources. But in current practice, P2P networks often contain large numbers of users who utilize resources shared by other nodes, but who do not share anything themselves (often referred to as the "freeloader problem"). Freeloading can have a profound impact on the network and in some cases can cause the community to collapse.[54] In these types of networks "users have natural disincentives to cooperate because cooperation consumes their own resources and may degrade their own performance."[55] Studying the social attributes of P2P networks is challenging due to large populations of turnover, asymmetry of interest and zero-cost identity.[55] A variety of incentive mechanisms have been implemented to encourage or even force nodes to contribute resources.[56]

Some researchers have explored the benefits of enabling virtual communities to self-organize and introduce incentives for resource sharing and cooperation, arguing that the social aspect missing from today's P2P systems should be seen both as a goal and a means for self-organized virtual communities to be built and fostered.[57] Ongoing research efforts for designing effective incentive mechanisms in P2P systems, based on principles from game theory, are beginning to take on a more psychological and information-processing direction.

Privacy and anonymity

Some peer-to-peer networks (e.g. Freenet) place a heavy emphasis on privacy and anonymity—that is, ensuring that the contents of communications are hidden from eavesdroppers, and that the identities/locations of the participants are concealed. Public key cryptography can be used to provide encryption, data validation, authorization, and authentication for data/messages. Onion routing and other mix network protocols (e.g. Tarzan) can be used to provide anonymity.[58]

Perpetrators of live streaming sexual abuse and other cybercrimes have used peer-to-peer platforms to carry out activities with anonymity.[59]

Political implications

Intellectual property law and illegal sharing

Although peer-to-peer networks can be used for legitimate purposes, rights holders have targeted peer-to-peer over the involvement with sharing copyrighted material. Peer-to-peer networking involves data transfer from one user to another without using an intermediate server. Companies developing P2P applications have been involved in numerous legal cases, primarily in the United States, primarily over issues surrounding copyright law.[50] Two major cases are Grokster vs RIAA and MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster, Ltd.[51] In both of the cases the file sharing technology was ruled to be legal as long as the developers had no ability to prevent the sharing of the copyrighted material. To establish criminal liability for the copyright infringement on peer-to-peer systems, the government must prove that the defendant infringed a copyright willingly for the purpose of personal financial gain or commercial advantage.[60] Fair use exceptions allow limited use of copyrighted material to be downloaded without acquiring permission from the rights holders. These documents are usually news reporting or under the lines of research and scholarly work. Controversies have developed over the concern of illegitimate use of peer-to-peer networks regarding public safety and national security. When a file is downloaded through a peer-to-peer network, it is impossible to know who created the file or what users are connected to the network at a given time. Trustworthiness of sources is a potential security threat that can be seen with peer-to-peer systems.[61]

A study ordered by the European Union found that illegal downloading may lead to an increase in overall video game sales because newer games charge for extra features or levels. The paper concluded that piracy had a negative financial impact on movies, music, and literature. The study relied on self-reported data about game purchases and use of illegal download sites. Pains were taken to remove effects of false and misremembered responses.[62][63][64]

Network neutrality

Peer-to-peer applications present one of the core issues in the network neutrality controversy. Internet service providers (ISPs) have been known to throttle P2P file-sharing traffic due to its high-bandwidth usage.[65] Compared to Web browsing, e-mail or many other uses of the internet, where data is only transferred in short intervals and relative small quantities, P2P file-sharing often consists of relatively heavy bandwidth usage due to ongoing file transfers and swarm/network coordination packets. In October 2007, Comcast, one of the largest broadband Internet providers in the United States, started blocking P2P applications such as BitTorrent. Their rationale was that P2P is mostly used to share illegal content, and their infrastructure is not designed for continuous, high-bandwidth traffic. Critics point out that P2P networking has legitimate legal uses, and that this is another way that large providers are trying to control use and content on the Internet, and direct people towards a client–server-based application architecture. The client–server model provides financial barriers-to-entry to small publishers and individuals, and can be less efficient for sharing large files. As a reaction to this bandwidth throttling, several P2P applications started implementing protocol obfuscation, such as the BitTorrent protocol encryption. Techniques for achieving "protocol obfuscation" involves removing otherwise easily identifiable properties of protocols, such as deterministic byte sequences and packet sizes, by making the data look as if it were random.[66] The ISP's solution to the high bandwidth is P2P caching, where an ISP stores the part of files most accessed by P2P clients in order to save access to the Internet.

Current research

Researchers have used computer simulations to aid in understanding and evaluating the complex behaviors of individuals within the network. "Networking research often relies on simulation in order to test and evaluate new ideas. An important requirement of this process is that results must be reproducible so that other researchers can replicate, validate, and extend existing work."[67] If the research cannot be reproduced, then the opportunity for further research is hindered. "Even though new simulators continue to be released, the research community tends towards only a handful of open-source simulators. The demand for features in simulators, as shown by our criteria and survey, is high. Therefore, the community should work together to get these features in open-source software. This would reduce the need for custom simulators, and hence increase repeatability and reputability of experiments."[67]

Besides all the above stated facts, there has also been work done on ns-2 open source network simulators. One research issue related to free rider detection and punishment has been explored using ns-2 simulator here.[68]

See also

References

  1. ^ Cope, James (2002-04-08). "What's a Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Network?". Computerworld. Retrieved 2021-12-21.
  2. ^ Rüdiger Schollmeier, A Definition of Peer-to-Peer Networking for the Classification of Peer-to-Peer Architectures and Applications, Proceedings of the First International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing, IEEE (2002).
  3. ^ Bandara, H. M. N. D; A. P. Jayasumana (2012). "Collaborative Applications over Peer-to-Peer Systems – Challenges and Solutions". Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications. 6 (3): 257–276. arXiv:1207.0790. Bibcode:2012arXiv1207.0790D. doi:10.1007/s12083-012-0157-3. S2CID 14008541.
  4. ^ a b Barkai, David (2001). Peer-to-peer computing : technologies for sharing and collaborating on the net. Hillsboro, OR: Intel Press. ISBN 978-0970284679. OCLC 49354877.
  5. ^ Saroiu, Stefan; Gummadi, Krishna P.; Gribble, Steven D. (2003-08-01). "Measuring and analyzing the characteristics of Napster and Gnutella hosts". Multimedia Systems. 9 (2): 170–184. doi:10.1007/s00530-003-0088-1. ISSN 1432-1882. S2CID 15963045.
  6. ^ a b Oram, Andrew, ed. (2001). Peer-to-peer: harnessing the benefits of a disruptive technologies. Sebastopol, California: O'Reilly. ISBN 9780596001100. OCLC 123103147.
  7. ^ RFC 1, Host Software, S. Crocker, IETF Working Group (April 7, 1969)
  8. ^ Berners-Lee, Tim (August 1996). "The World Wide Web: Past, Present and Future". Retrieved 5 November 2011.
  9. ^ Sandhu, R.; Zhang, X. (2005). "Peer-to-peer access control architecture using trusted computing technology". Proceedings of the Tenth ACM Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies - SACMAT '05: 147–158. doi:10.1145/1063979.1064005. ISBN 1595930450. S2CID 1478064.
  10. ^ a b c d Steinmetz, Ralf; Wehrle, Klaus (2005). "2. What Is This "Peer-to-Peer" About?". Peer-to-Peer Systems and Applications. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. pp. 9–16. doi:10.1007/11530657_2. ISBN 9783540291923.
  11. ^ Horton, Mark, and Rick Adams. "Standard for interchange of USENET messages." (1987): 1. https://www.hjp.at/doc/rfc/rfc1036.html 2021-06-12 at the Wayback Machine
  12. ^ Ahson, Syed A.; Ilyas, Mohammad, eds. (2008). SIP Handbook: Services, Technologies, and Security of Session Initiation Protocol. Taylor & Francis. p. 204. ISBN 9781420066043.
  13. ^ Zhu, Ce; et al., eds. (2010). Streaming Media Architectures: Techniques and Applications: Recent Advances. IGI Global. p. 265. ISBN 9781616928339.
  14. ^ Kamel, Mina; et al. (2007). "Optimal Topology Design for Overlay Networks". In Akyildiz, Ian F. (ed.). Networking 2007: Ad Hoc and Sensor Networks, Wireless Networks, Next Generation Internet: 6th International IFIP-TC6 Networking Conference, Atlanta, GA, USA, May 14-18, 2007 Proceedings. Springer. p. 714. ISBN 9783540726050.
  15. ^ Filali, Imen; et al. (2011). "A Survey of Structured P2P Systems for RDF Data Storage and Retrieval". In Hameurlain, Abdelkader; et al. (eds.). Transactions on Large-Scale Data- and Knowledge-Centered Systems III: Special Issue on Data and Knowledge Management in Grid and PSP Systems. Springer. p. 21. ISBN 9783642230738.
  16. ^ Zulhasnine, Mohammed; et al. (2013). "P2P Streaming Over Cellular Networks: Issues, Challenges, and Opportunities". In Pathan; et al. (eds.). Building Next-Generation Converged Networks: Theory and Practice. CRC Press. p. 99. ISBN 9781466507616.
  17. ^ Chervenak, Ann; Bharathi, Shishir (2008). "Peer-to-peer Approaches to Grid Resource Discovery". In Danelutto, Marco; et al. (eds.). Making Grids Work: Proceedings of the CoreGRID Workshop on Programming Models Grid and P2P System Architecture Grid Systems, Tools and Environments 12-13 June 2007, Heraklion, Crete, Greece. Springer. p. 67. ISBN 9780387784489.
  18. ^ Jin, Xing; Chan, S.-H. Gary (2010). "Unstructured Peer-to-Peer Network Architectures". In Shen; et al. (eds.). Handbook of Peer-to-Peer Networking. Springer. p. 119. ISBN 978-0-387-09750-3.
  19. ^ a b Lv, Qin; et al. (2002). "Can Heterogeneity Make Gnutella Stable?". In Druschel, Peter; et al. (eds.). Peer-to-Peer Systems: First International Workshop, IPTPS 2002, Cambridge, MA, USA, March 7-8, 2002, Revised Papers. Springer. p. 94. ISBN 9783540441793.
  20. ^ Shen, Xuemin; Yu, Heather; Buford, John; Akon, Mursalin (2009). Handbook of Peer-to-Peer Networking (1st ed.). New York: Springer. p. 118. ISBN 978-0-387-09750-3.
  21. ^ Typically approximating O(log N), where N is the number of nodes in the P2P system[citation needed]
  22. ^ Other design choices include overlay rings and d-Torus. See for example Bandara, H. M. N. D.; Jayasumana, A. P. (2012). "Collaborative Applications over Peer-to-Peer Systems – Challenges and Solutions". Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications. 6 (3): 257. arXiv:1207.0790. Bibcode:2012arXiv1207.0790D. doi:10.1007/s12083-012-0157-3. S2CID 14008541.
  23. ^ R. Ranjan, A. Harwood, and R. Buyya, "Peer-to-peer based resource discovery in global grids: a tutorial," IEEE Commun. Surv., vol. 10, no. 2. and P. Trunfio, "Peer-to-Peer resource discovery in Grids: Models and systems," Future Generation Computer Systems archive, vol. 23, no. 7, Aug. 2007.
  24. ^ Kelaskar, M.; Matossian, V.; Mehra, P.; Paul, D.; Parashar, M. (2002). A Study of Discovery Mechanisms for Peer-to-Peer Application. pp. 444–. ISBN 9780769515823.
  25. ^ Dabek, Frank; Zhao, Ben; Druschel, Peter; Kubiatowicz, John; Stoica, Ion (2003). Towards a Common API for Structured Peer-to-Peer Overlays. Peer-to-Peer Systems II. Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. 2735. pp. 33–44. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.12.5548. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-45172-3_3. ISBN 978-3-540-40724-9.
  26. ^ Moni Naor and Udi Wieder. Novel Architectures for P2P Applications: the Continuous-Discrete Approach 2019-12-09 at the Wayback Machine. Proc. SPAA, 2003.
  27. ^ Gurmeet Singh Manku. Dipsea: A Modular Distributed Hash Table 2004-09-10 at the Wayback Machine. Ph. D. Thesis (Stanford University), August 2004.
  28. ^ Byung-Gon Chun, Ben Y. Zhao, John D. Kubiatowicz (2005-02-24). "Impact of Neighbor Selection on Performance and Resilience of Structured P2P Networks" (PDF). Retrieved 2019-08-24.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  29. ^ Li, Deng; et al. (2009). Vasilakos, A.V.; et al. (eds.). An Efficient, Scalable, and Robust P2P Overlay for Autonomic Communication. Springer. p. 329. ISBN 978-0-387-09752-7.
  30. ^ Bandara, H. M. N. Dilum; Jayasumana, Anura P. (January 2012). "Evaluation of P2P Resource Discovery Architectures Using Real-Life Multi-Attribute Resource and Query Characteristics". IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conf. (CCNC '12).
  31. ^ Korzun, Dmitry; Gurtov, Andrei (November 2012). Structured P2P Systems: Fundamentals of Hierarchical Organization, Routing, Scaling, and Security. Springer. ISBN 978-1-4614-5482-3.
  32. ^ Ranjan, Rajiv; Harwood, Aaron; Buyya, Rajkumar (1 December 2006). (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 14 May 2011. Retrieved 25 August 2008.
  33. ^ Ranjan, Rajiv; Chan, Lipo; Harwood, Aaron; Karunasekera, Shanika; Buyya, Rajkumar. (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2008-09-10.
  34. ^ Darlagiannis, Vasilios (2005). "Hybrid Peer-to-Peer Systems". In Steinmetz, Ralf; Wehrle, Klaus (eds.). Peer-to-Peer Systems and Applications. Springer. ISBN 9783540291923.
  35. ^ Yang, Beverly; Garcia-Molina, Hector (2001). "Comparing Hybrid Peer-to-Peer Systems" (PDF). Very Large Data Bases. Retrieved 8 October 2013.
  36. ^ Padmanabhan, Venkata N.[1]; Sripanidkulchai, Kunwadee [2] (2002). The Case for Cooperative Networking (PostScript with addendum). Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Vol. Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems. Cambridge, MA: Springer (published March 2002). pp. 178. doi:10.1007/3-540-45748-8_17. ISBN 978-3-540-44179-3. {{cite book}}: External link in |first1= and |first2= (help) PDF (Microsoft, with addendum) 2007-04-17 at the Wayback Machine PDF (Springer, original, fee may be required) 2023-01-01 at the Wayback Machine
  37. ^ "CoopNet: Cooperative Networking". Microsoft Research. Project home page.
  38. ^ Vu, Quang H.; et al. (2010). Peer-to-Peer Computing: Principles and Applications. Springer. p. 8. ISBN 978-3-642-03513-5.
  39. ^ Vu, Quang H.; et al. (2010). Peer-to-Peer Computing: Principles and Applications. Springer. pp. 157–159. ISBN 978-3-642-03513-5.
  40. ^ Goebel, Jan; et al. (2007). "Measurement and Analysis of Autonomous Spreading Malware in a University Environment". In Hämmerli, Bernhard Markus; Sommer, Robin (eds.). Detection of Intrusions and Malware, and Vulnerability Assessment: 4th International Conference, DIMVA 2007 Lucerne, Switzerland, July 12-13, 2007 Proceedings. Springer. p. 112. ISBN 9783540736134.
  41. ^ Sorkin, Andrew Ross (4 May 2003). "Software Bullet Is Sought to Kill Musical Piracy". New York Times. Retrieved 5 November 2011.
  42. ^ Singh, Vivek; Gupta, Himani (2012). Anonymous File Sharing in Peer to Peer System by Random Walks (Technical report). SRM University. 123456789/9306.
  43. ^ Lua, Eng Keong; Crowcroft, Jon; Pias, Marcelo; Sharma, Ravi; Lim, Steven (2005). . Archived from the original on 2012-07-24.
  44. ^ Balakrishnan, Hari; Kaashoek, M. Frans; Karger, David; Morris, Robert; Stoica, Ion (2003). "Looking up data in P2P systems" (PDF). Communications of the ACM. 46 (2): 43–48. CiteSeerX 10.1.1.5.3597. doi:10.1145/606272.606299. S2CID 2731647. Retrieved 8 October 2013.
  45. ^ . www.p2pnews.net. 14 June 2012. Archived from the original on 6 October 2013. Retrieved 10 October 2013.
  46. ^ Sharma P., Bhakuni A. & Kaushal R."Performance Analysis of BitTorrent Protocol 2015-02-13 at the Wayback Machine. National Conference on Communications, 2013 doi:10.1109/NCC.2013.6488040
  47. ^ Li, Jin (2008). "On peer-to-peer (P2P) content delivery" (PDF). Peer-to-Peer Networking and Applications. 1 (1): 45–63 ≤≥. doi:10.1007/s12083-007-0003-1. S2CID 16438304.
  48. ^ Stutzbach, Daniel; et al. (2005). "The scalability of swarming peer-to-peer content delivery" (PDF). In Boutaba, Raouf; et al. (eds.). NETWORKING 2005 -- Networking Technologies, Services, and Protocols; Performance of Computer and Communication Networks; Mobile and Wireless Communications Systems. Springer. pp. 15–26. ISBN 978-3-540-25809-4.
  49. ^ Gareth Tyson, Andreas Mauthe, Sebastian Kaune, Mu Mu and Thomas Plagemann. Corelli: A Dynamic Replication Service for Supporting Latency-Dependent Content in Community Networks. In Proc. 16th ACM/SPIE Multimedia Computing and Networking Conference (MMCN), San Jose, CA (2009). (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2011-04-29. Retrieved 2011-03-12.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  50. ^ a b Glorioso, Andrea; et al. (2010). "The Social Impact of P2P Systems". In Shen; et al. (eds.). Handbook of Peer-to-Peer Networking. Springer. p. 48. ISBN 978-0-387-09750-3.
  51. ^ a b John Borland (April 25, 2003). . news.cnet.com. Archived from the original on 2012-03-10.
  52. ^ Walker, Leslie (2001-11-08). "Uncle Sam Wants Napster!". The Washington Post. Retrieved 2010-05-22.
  53. ^ Hammerksjold Andreas; Engler, Narkis, "Delivery Optimization - a deep dive" 2019-02-04 at the Wayback Machine, Channel 9, 11 October 2017, Retrieved on 4 February 2019.
  54. ^ Krishnan, R., Smith, M. D., Tang, Z., & Telang, R. (2004, January). The impact of free-riding on peer-to-peer networks. In System Sciences, 2004. Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on (pp. 10-pp). IEEE.
  55. ^ a b Feldman, M., Lai, K., Stoica, I., & Chuang, J. (2004, May). Robust incentive techniques for peer-to-peer networks. In Proceedings of the 5th ACM conference on Electronic commerce (pp. 102-111). ACM.
  56. ^ Vu, Quang H.; et al. (2010). Peer-to-Peer Computing: Principles and Applications. Springer. p. 172. ISBN 978-3-642-03513-5.
  57. ^ P. Antoniadis and B. Le Grand, "Incentives for resource sharing in self-organized communities: From economics to social psychology," Digital Information Management (ICDIM '07), 2007
  58. ^ Vu, Quang H.; et al. (2010). Peer-to-Peer Computing: Principles and Applications. Springer. pp. 179–181. ISBN 978-3-642-03513-5.
  59. ^ "No country is free from child sexual abuse, exploitation, UN's top rights forum hears". UN News. March 3, 2020.
  60. ^ Majoras, D. B. (2005). Peer-to-peer file-sharing technology consumer protection and competition issues. Federal Trade Commission, Retrieved from http://www.ftc.gov/reports/p2p05/050623p2prpt.pdf 2012-11-01 at the Wayback Machine
  61. ^ The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, (2008). Peer-to-peer network. Retrieved from website: http://www.infosec.gov.hk/english/technical/files/peer.pdf 2019-12-09 at the Wayback Machine
  62. ^ Sanders, Linley (2017-09-22). "Illegal downloads may not actually harm sales, but the European Union doesn't want you to know that". Newsweek. Retrieved 2018-03-29.
  63. ^ Polgar, David Ryan (October 15, 2017). "Does Video Game Piracy Actually Result in More Sales?". Big Think. Retrieved 2018-03-29.
  64. ^ Orland, Kyle (September 26, 2017). "EU study finds piracy doesn't hurt game sales, may actually help". Ars Technica. Retrieved 2018-03-29.
  65. ^ Janko Roettgers, 5 Ways to Test Whether your ISP throttles P2P, http://newteevee.com/2008/04/02/5-ways-to-test-if-your-isp-throttles-p2p/ 2009-10-01 at the Wayback Machine
  66. ^ Hjelmvik, Erik; John, Wolfgang (2010-07-27). "Breaking and Improving Protocol Obfuscation" (PDF). Technical Report. ISSN 1652-926X.
  67. ^ a b Basu, A., Fleming, S., Stanier, J., Naicken, S., Wakeman, I., & Gurbani, V. K. (2013). The state of peer-to-peer network simulators. ACM Computing Surveys, 45(4), 46.
  68. ^ A Bhakuni, P Sharma, R Kaushal "Free-rider detection and punishment in BitTorrent based P2P networks" 2023-01-01 at the Wayback Machine, International Advanced Computing Conference, 2014. doi:10.1109/IAdCC.2014.6779311

External links

 
Wikimedia Commons has media related to Peer-to-peer.
  • Ghosh Debjani, Rajan Payas, Pandey Mayank P2P-VoD Streaming: Design Issues & User Experience Challenges 2017-02-19 at the Wayback Machine Springer Proceedings, June 2014
  • of P2P terminology
  • , Special Issue, Elsevier Journal of Computer Communication, (Ed) Javed I. Khan and Adam Wierzbicki, Volume 31, Issue 2, February 2008
  • Anderson, Ross J. "The eternity service". Pragocrypt. 1996.
  • Marling Engle & J. I. Khan. Vulnerabilities of P2P systems and a critical look at their solutions 2007-06-15 at the Wayback Machine, May 2006
  • Stephanos Androutsellis-Theotokis and Diomidis Spinellis. A survey of peer-to-peer content distribution technologies 2020-11-09 at the Wayback Machine. ACM Computing Surveys, 36(4):335–371, December 2004.
  • Biddle, Peter, Paul England, Marcus Peinado, and Bryan Willman, The Darknet and the Future of Content Distribution 2011-07-27 at the Wayback Machine. In 2002 ACM Workshop on Digital Rights Management, November 2002.
  • John F. Buford, Heather Yu, Eng Keong Lua . ISBN 0123742145, Morgan Kaufmann, December 2008
  • Djamal-Eddine Meddour, Mubashar Mushtaq, and Toufik Ahmed, "Open Issues in P2P Multimedia Streaming 2011-08-22 at the Wayback Machine", in the proceedings of the 1st Multimedia Communications Workshop MULTICOMM 2006 held in conjunction with IEEE ICC 2006 pp 43–48, June 2006, Istanbul, Turkey.
  • Detlef Schoder and Kai Fischbach, "Core Concepts in Peer-to-Peer (P2P) Networking 2011-09-15 at the Wayback Machine". In: Subramanian, R.; Goodman, B. (eds.): P2P Computing: The Evolution of a Disruptive Technology, Idea Group Inc, Hershey. 2005
  • Ramesh Subramanian and Brian Goodman (eds), , ISBN 1-59140-429-0, Idea Group Inc., Hershey, PA, United States, 2005.
  • Shuman Ghosemajumder. Advanced Peer-Based Technology Business Models 2012-10-13 at the Wayback Machine. MIT Sloan School of Management, 2002.
  • Silverthorne, Sean. Music Downloads: Pirates- or Customers? 2006-06-30 at the Wayback Machine. Harvard Business School Working Knowledge, 2004.
  • Glasnost 2014-10-05 at the Wayback Machine test P2P traffic shaping (Max Planck Institute for Software Systems)

January 13, 2023
peer, peer, other, uses, disambiguation, point, point, disambiguation, disambiguation, this, article, tone, style, reflect, encyclopedic, tone, used, wikipedia, wikipedia, guide, writing, better, articles, suggestions, april, 2021, learn, when, remove, this, t. For other uses see Peer to peer disambiguation Point to point disambiguation and P2P disambiguation This article s tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia See Wikipedia s guide to writing better articles for suggestions April 2021 Learn how and when to remove this template message Peer to peer P2P computing or networking is a distributed application architecture that partitions tasks or workloads between peers Peers are equally privileged equipotent participants in the network They are said to form a peer to peer network of nodes 1 Apeer to peer P2P network in which interconnected nodes peers share resources amongst each other without the use of a centralized administrative system A network based on the client server model where individual clients request services and resources from centralized servers Peers make a portion of their resources such as processing power disk storage or network bandwidth directly available to other network participants without the need for central coordination by servers or stable hosts 2 Peers are both suppliers and consumers of resources in contrast to the traditional client server model in which the consumption and supply of resources are divided 3 While P2P systems had previously been used in many application domains 4 the architecture was popularized by the file sharing system Napster originally released in 1999 5 The concept has inspired new structures and philosophies in many areas of human interaction In such social contexts peer to peer as a meme refers to the egalitarian social networking that has emerged throughout society enabled by Internet technologies in general Contents 1 Historical development 2 Architecture 2 1 Routing and resource discovery 2 1 1 Unstructured networks 2 1 2 Structured networks 2 1 3 Hybrid models 2 1 4 CoopNet content distribution system 2 2 Security and trust 2 2 1 Routing attacks 2 2 2 Corrupted data and malware 2 3 Resilient and scalable computer networks 2 4 Distributed storage and search 3 Applications 3 1 Content delivery 3 2 File sharing networks 3 2 1 Copyright infringements 3 3 Multimedia 3 4 Other P2P applications 4 Social implications 4 1 Incentivizing resource sharing and cooperation 4 1 1 Privacy and anonymity 5 Political implications 5 1 Intellectual property law and illegal sharing 5 2 Network neutrality 6 Current research 7 See also 8 References 9 External linksHistorical development Edit SETI home was established in 1999 While P2P systems had previously been used in many application domains 4 the concept was popularized by file sharing systems such as the music sharing application Napster originally released in 1999 The peer to peer movement allowed millions of Internet users to connect directly forming groups and collaborating to become user created search engines virtual supercomputers and filesystems 6 The basic concept of peer to peer computing was envisioned in earlier software systems and networking discussions reaching back to principles stated in the first Request for Comments RFC 1 7 Tim Berners Lee s vision for the World Wide Web was close to a P2P network in that it assumed each user of the web would be an active editor and contributor creating and linking content to form an interlinked web of links The early Internet was more open than the present day where two machines connected to the Internet could send packets to each other without firewalls and other security measures 6 page needed This contrasts to the broadcasting like structure of the web as it has developed over the years 8 9 10 As a precursor to the Internet ARPANET was a successful client server network where every participating node could request and serve content However ARPANET was not self organized and it lacked the ability to provide any means for context or content based routing beyond simple address based routing 10 Therefore Usenet a distributed messaging system that is often described as an early peer to peer architecture was established It was developed in 1979 as a system that enforces a decentralized model of control 11 The basic model is a client server model from the user or client perspective that offers a self organizing approach to newsgroup servers However news servers communicate with one another as peers to propagate Usenet news articles over the entire group of network servers The same consideration applies to SMTP email in the sense that the core email relaying network of mail transfer agents has a peer to peer character while the periphery of Email clients and their direct connections is strictly a client server relationship citation needed In May 1999 with millions more people on the Internet Shawn Fanning introduced the music and file sharing application called Napster 10 Napster was the beginning of peer to peer networks as we know them today where participating users establish a virtual network entirely independent from the physical network without having to obey any administrative authorities or restrictions 10 Architecture EditA peer to peer network is designed around the notion of equal peer nodes simultaneously functioning as both clients and servers to the other nodes on the network This model of network arrangement differs from the client server model where communication is usually to and from a central server A typical example of a file transfer that uses the client server model is the File Transfer Protocol FTP service in which the client and server programs are distinct the clients initiate the transfer and the servers satisfy these requests Routing and resource discovery Edit Peer to peer networks generally implement some form of virtual overlay network on top of the physical network topology where the nodes in the overlay form a subset of the nodes in the physical network Data is still exchanged directly over the underlying TCP IP network but at the application layer peers are able to communicate with each other directly via the logical overlay links each of which corresponds to a path through the underlying physical network Overlays are used for indexing and peer discovery and make the P2P system independent from the physical network topology Based on how the nodes are linked to each other within the overlay network and how resources are indexed and located we can classify networks as unstructured or structured or as a hybrid between the two 12 13 14 Unstructured networks Edit Overlay network diagram for an unstructured P2P network illustrating the ad hoc nature of the connections between nodes Unstructured peer to peer networks do not impose a particular structure on the overlay network by design but rather are formed by nodes that randomly form connections to each other 15 Gnutella Gossip and Kazaa are examples of unstructured P2P protocols 16 Because there is no structure globally imposed upon them unstructured networks are easy to build and allow for localized optimizations to different regions of the overlay 17 Also because the role of all peers in the network is the same unstructured networks are highly robust in the face of high rates of churn that is when large numbers of peers are frequently joining and leaving the network 18 19 However the primary limitations of unstructured networks also arise from this lack of structure In particular when a peer wants to find a desired piece of data in the network the search query must be flooded through the network to find as many peers as possible that share the data Flooding causes a very high amount of signaling traffic in the network uses more CPU memory by requiring every peer to process all search queries and does not ensure that search queries will always be resolved Furthermore since there is no correlation between a peer and the content managed by it there is no guarantee that flooding will find a peer that has the desired data Popular content is likely to be available at several peers and any peer searching for it is likely to find the same thing But if a peer is looking for rare data shared by only a few other peers then it is highly unlikely that search will be successful 20 Structured networks Edit Overlay network diagram for a structured P2P network using a distributed hash table DHT to identify and locate nodes resources In structured peer to peer networks the overlay is organized into a specific topology and the protocol ensures that any node can efficiently 21 search the network for a file resource even if the resource is extremely rare The most common type of structured P2P networks implement a distributed hash table DHT 22 23 in which a variant of consistent hashing is used to assign ownership of each file to a particular peer 24 25 This enables peers to search for resources on the network using a hash table that is key value pairs are stored in the DHT and any participating node can efficiently retrieve the value associated with a given key 26 27 Distributed hash tables However in order to route traffic efficiently through the network nodes in a structured overlay must maintain lists of neighbors 28 that satisfy specific criteria This makes them less robust in networks with a high rate of churn i e with large numbers of nodes frequently joining and leaving the network 19 29 More recent evaluation of P2P resource discovery solutions under real workloads have pointed out several issues in DHT based solutions such as high cost of advertising discovering resources and static and dynamic load imbalance 30 Notable distributed networks that use DHTs include Tixati an alternative to BitTorrent s distributed tracker the Kad network the Storm botnet and the YaCy Some prominent research projects include the Chord project Kademlia PAST storage utility P Grid a self organized and emerging overlay network and CoopNet content distribution system 31 DHT based networks have also been widely utilized for accomplishing efficient resource discovery 32 33 for grid computing systems as it aids in resource management and scheduling of applications Hybrid models Edit Hybrid models are a combination of peer to peer and client server models 34 A common hybrid model is to have a central server that helps peers find each other Spotify was an example of a hybrid model until 2014 There are a variety of hybrid models all of which make trade offs between the centralized functionality provided by a structured server client network and the node equality afforded by the pure peer to peer unstructured networks Currently hybrid models have better performance than either pure unstructured networks or pure structured networks because certain functions such as searching do require a centralized functionality but benefit from the decentralized aggregation of nodes provided by unstructured networks 35 CoopNet content distribution system Edit CoopNet Cooperative Networking was a proposed system for off loading serving to peers who have recently downloaded content proposed by computer scientists Venkata N Padmanabhan and Kunwadee Sripanidkulchai working at Microsoft Research and Carnegie Mellon University 36 37 When a server experiences an increase in load it redirects incoming peers to other peers who have agreed to mirror the content thus off loading balance from the server All of the information is retained at the server This system makes use of the fact that the bottle neck is most likely in the outgoing bandwidth than the CPU hence its server centric design It assigns peers to other peers who are close in IP to its neighbors same prefix range in an attempt to use locality If multiple peers are found with the same file it designates that the node choose the fastest of its neighbors Streaming media is transmitted by having clients cache the previous stream and then transmit it piece wise to new nodes Security and trust Edit Peer to peer systems pose unique challenges from a computer security perspective Like any other form of software P2P applications can contain vulnerabilities What makes this particularly dangerous for P2P software however is that peer to peer applications act as servers as well as clients meaning that they can be more vulnerable to remote exploits 38 Routing attacks Edit Since each node plays a role in routing traffic through the network malicious users can perform a variety of routing attacks or denial of service attacks Examples of common routing attacks include incorrect lookup routing whereby malicious nodes deliberately forward requests incorrectly or return false results incorrect routing updates where malicious nodes corrupt the routing tables of neighboring nodes by sending them false information and incorrect routing network partition where when new nodes are joining they bootstrap via a malicious node which places the new node in a partition of the network that is populated by other malicious nodes 39 Corrupted data and malware Edit See also Data validation and Malware The prevalence of malware varies between different peer to peer protocols Studies analyzing the spread of malware on P2P networks found for example that 63 of the answered download requests on the gnutella network contained some form of malware whereas only 3 of the content on OpenFT contained malware In both cases the top three most common types of malware accounted for the large majority of cases 99 in gnutella and 65 in OpenFT Another study analyzing traffic on the Kazaa network found that 15 of the 500 000 file sample taken were infected by one or more of the 365 different computer viruses that were tested for 40 Corrupted data can also be distributed on P2P networks by modifying files that are already being shared on the network For example on the FastTrack network the RIAA managed to introduce faked chunks into downloads and downloaded files mostly MP3 files Files infected with the RIAA virus were unusable afterwards and contained malicious code The RIAA is also known to have uploaded fake music and movies to P2P networks in order to deter illegal file sharing 41 Consequently the P2P networks of today have seen an enormous increase of their security and file verification mechanisms Modern hashing chunk verification and different encryption methods have made most networks resistant to almost any type of attack even when major parts of the respective network have been replaced by faked or nonfunctional hosts 42 Resilient and scalable computer networks Edit See also Wireless mesh network and Distributed computing The decentralized nature of P2P networks increases robustness because it removes the single point of failure that can be inherent in a client server based system 43 As nodes arrive and demand on the system increases the total capacity of the system also increases and the likelihood of failure decreases If one peer on the network fails to function properly the whole network is not compromised or damaged In contrast in a typical client server architecture clients share only their demands with the system but not their resources In this case as more clients join the system fewer resources are available to serve each client and if the central server fails the entire network is taken down Distributed storage and search Edit Search results for the query software libre using YaCy a free distributed search engine that runs on a peer to peer network instead of making requests to centralized index servers like Google Yahoo and other corporate search engines There are both advantages and disadvantages in P2P networks related to the topic of data backup recovery and availability In a centralized network the system administrators are the only forces controlling the availability of files being shared If the administrators decide to no longer distribute a file they simply have to remove it from their servers and it will no longer be available to users Along with leaving the users powerless in deciding what is distributed throughout the community this makes the entire system vulnerable to threats and requests from the government and other large forces For example YouTube has been pressured by the RIAA MPAA and entertainment industry to filter out copyrighted content Although server client networks are able to monitor and manage content availability they can have more stability in the availability of the content they choose to host A client should not have trouble accessing obscure content that is being shared on a stable centralized network P2P networks however are more unreliable in sharing unpopular files because sharing files in a P2P network requires that at least one node in the network has the requested data and that node must be able to connect to the node requesting the data This requirement is occasionally hard to meet because users may delete or stop sharing data at any point 44 In this sense the community of users in a P2P network is completely responsible for deciding what content is available Unpopular files will eventually disappear and become unavailable as more people stop sharing them Popular files however will be highly and easily distributed Popular files on a P2P network actually have more stability and availability than files on central networks In a centralized network a simple loss of connection between the server and clients is enough to cause a failure but in P2P networks the connections between every node must be lost in order to cause a data sharing failure In a centralized system the administrators are responsible for all data recovery and backups while in P2P systems each node requires its own backup system Because of the lack of central authority in P2P networks forces such as the recording industry RIAA MPAA and the government are unable to delete or stop the sharing of content on P2P systems 45 Applications EditThis article is in list format but may read better as prose You can help by converting this article if appropriate Editing help is available September 2014 Content delivery Edit In P2P networks clients both provide and use resources This means that unlike client server systems the content serving capacity of peer to peer networks can actually increase as more users begin to access the content especially with protocols such as Bittorrent that require users to share refer a performance measurement study 46 This property is one of the major advantages of using P2P networks because it makes the setup and running costs very small for the original content distributor 47 48 File sharing networks Edit Many peer to peer file sharing networks such as Gnutella G2 and the eDonkey network popularized peer to peer technologies Peer to peer content delivery networks Peer to peer content services e g caches for improved performance such as Correli Caches 49 Software publication and distribution Linux distribution several games via file sharing networks Copyright infringements Edit Peer to peer networking involves data transfer from one user to another without using an intermediate server Companies developing P2P applications have been involved in numerous legal cases primarily in the United States over conflicts with copyright law 50 Two major cases are Grokster vs RIAA and MGM Studios Inc v Grokster Ltd 51 In the last case the Court unanimously held that defendant peer to peer file sharing companies Grokster and Streamcast could be sued for inducing copyright infringement Multimedia Edit The P2PTV and PDTP protocols Some proprietary multimedia applications use a peer to peer network along with streaming servers to stream audio and video to their clients Peercasting for multicasting streams Pennsylvania State University MIT and Simon Fraser University are carrying on a project called LionShare designed for facilitating file sharing among educational institutions globally Osiris is a program that allows its users to create anonymous and autonomous web portals distributed via P2P network Other P2P applications Edit Torrent file connect peers Bitcoin and additional such as Ether Nxt and Peercoin are peer to peer based digital cryptocurrencies Dat a distributed version controlled publishing platform Filecoin is an open source public cryptocurrency and digital payment system intended to be a blockchain based cooperative digital storage and data retrieval method I2P an overlay network used to browse the Internet anonymously Unlike the related I2P the Tor network is not itself peer to peer dubious discuss however it can enable peer to peer applications to be built on top of it via onion services The InterPlanetary File System IPFS is a protocol and network designed to create a content addressable peer to peer method of storing and sharing hypermedia distribution protocol Nodes in the IPFS network form a distributed file system Jami a peer to peer chat and SIP app JXTA a peer to peer protocol designed for the Java platform Netsukuku a Wireless community network designed to be independent from the Internet Open Garden connection sharing application that shares Internet access with other devices using Wi Fi or Bluetooth Resilio Sync a directory syncing app Research like the Chord project the PAST storage utility the P Grid and the CoopNet content distribution system Syncthing a directory syncing app Tradepal and M commerce applications that power real time marketplaces The U S Department of Defense is conducting research on P2P networks as part of its modern network warfare strategy 52 In May 2003 Anthony Tether then director of DARPA testified that the United States military uses P2P networks WebTorrent is a P2P streaming torrent client in JavaScript for use in web browsers as well as in the WebTorrent Desktop stand alone version that bridges WebTorrent and BitTorrent serverless networks Microsoft in Windows 10 uses a proprietary peer to peer technology called Delivery Optimization to deploy operating system updates using end users PCs either on the local network or other PCs According to Microsoft s Channel 9 it led to a 30 50 reduction in Internet bandwidth usage 53 Artisoft s LANtastic was built as a peer to peer operating system Machines can be both servers and workstations at the same time Hotline Communications Hotline Client was built as decentralized servers with tracker software dedicated to any type of files and still operates today Social implications EditSee also Social peer to peer processes Incentivizing resource sharing and cooperation Edit The BitTorrent protocol In this animation the colored bars beneath all of the 7 clients in the upper region above represent the file being shared with each color representing an individual piece of the file After the initial pieces transfer from the seed large system at the bottom the pieces are individually transferred from client to client The original seeder only needs to send out one copy of the file for all the clients to receive a copy Cooperation among a community of participants is key to the continued success of P2P systems aimed at casual human users these reach their full potential only when large numbers of nodes contribute resources But in current practice P2P networks often contain large numbers of users who utilize resources shared by other nodes but who do not share anything themselves often referred to as the freeloader problem Freeloading can have a profound impact on the network and in some cases can cause the community to collapse 54 In these types of networks users have natural disincentives to cooperate because cooperation consumes their own resources and may degrade their own performance 55 Studying the social attributes of P2P networks is challenging due to large populations of turnover asymmetry of interest and zero cost identity 55 A variety of incentive mechanisms have been implemented to encourage or even force nodes to contribute resources 56 Some researchers have explored the benefits of enabling virtual communities to self organize and introduce incentives for resource sharing and cooperation arguing that the social aspect missing from today s P2P systems should be seen both as a goal and a means for self organized virtual communities to be built and fostered 57 Ongoing research efforts for designing effective incentive mechanisms in P2P systems based on principles from game theory are beginning to take on a more psychological and information processing direction Privacy and anonymity Edit Some peer to peer networks e g Freenet place a heavy emphasis on privacy and anonymity that is ensuring that the contents of communications are hidden from eavesdroppers and that the identities locations of the participants are concealed Public key cryptography can be used to provide encryption data validation authorization and authentication for data messages Onion routing and other mix network protocols e g Tarzan can be used to provide anonymity 58 Perpetrators of live streaming sexual abuse and other cybercrimes have used peer to peer platforms to carry out activities with anonymity 59 Political implications EditIntellectual property law and illegal sharing Edit Although peer to peer networks can be used for legitimate purposes rights holders have targeted peer to peer over the involvement with sharing copyrighted material Peer to peer networking involves data transfer from one user to another without using an intermediate server Companies developing P2P applications have been involved in numerous legal cases primarily in the United States primarily over issues surrounding copyright law 50 Two major cases are Grokster vs RIAA and MGM Studios Inc v Grokster Ltd 51 In both of the cases the file sharing technology was ruled to be legal as long as the developers had no ability to prevent the sharing of the copyrighted material To establish criminal liability for the copyright infringement on peer to peer systems the government must prove that the defendant infringed a copyright willingly for the purpose of personal financial gain or commercial advantage 60 Fair use exceptions allow limited use of copyrighted material to be downloaded without acquiring permission from the rights holders These documents are usually news reporting or under the lines of research and scholarly work Controversies have developed over the concern of illegitimate use of peer to peer networks regarding public safety and national security When a file is downloaded through a peer to peer network it is impossible to know who created the file or what users are connected to the network at a given time Trustworthiness of sources is a potential security threat that can be seen with peer to peer systems 61 A study ordered by the European Union found that illegal downloading may lead to an increase in overall video game sales because newer games charge for extra features or levels The paper concluded that piracy had a negative financial impact on movies music and literature The study relied on self reported data about game purchases and use of illegal download sites Pains were taken to remove effects of false and misremembered responses 62 63 64 Network neutrality Edit Peer to peer applications present one of the core issues in the network neutrality controversy Internet service providers ISPs have been known to throttle P2P file sharing traffic due to its high bandwidth usage 65 Compared to Web browsing e mail or many other uses of the internet where data is only transferred in short intervals and relative small quantities P2P file sharing often consists of relatively heavy bandwidth usage due to ongoing file transfers and swarm network coordination packets In October 2007 Comcast one of the largest broadband Internet providers in the United States started blocking P2P applications such as BitTorrent Their rationale was that P2P is mostly used to share illegal content and their infrastructure is not designed for continuous high bandwidth traffic Critics point out that P2P networking has legitimate legal uses and that this is another way that large providers are trying to control use and content on the Internet and direct people towards a client server based application architecture The client server model provides financial barriers to entry to small publishers and individuals and can be less efficient for sharing large files As a reaction to this bandwidth throttling several P2P applications started implementing protocol obfuscation such as the BitTorrent protocol encryption Techniques for achieving protocol obfuscation involves removing otherwise easily identifiable properties of protocols such as deterministic byte sequences and packet sizes by making the data look as if it were random 66 The ISP s solution to the high bandwidth is P2P caching where an ISP stores the part of files most accessed by P2P clients in order to save access to the Internet Current research EditResearchers have used computer simulations to aid in understanding and evaluating the complex behaviors of individuals within the network Networking research often relies on simulation in order to test and evaluate new ideas An important requirement of this process is that results must be reproducible so that other researchers can replicate validate and extend existing work 67 If the research cannot be reproduced then the opportunity for further research is hindered Even though new simulators continue to be released the research community tends towards only a handful of open source simulators The demand for features in simulators as shown by our criteria and survey is high Therefore the community should work together to get these features in open source software This would reduce the need for custom simulators and hence increase repeatability and reputability of experiments 67 Besides all the above stated facts there has also been work done on ns 2 open source network simulators One research issue related to free rider detection and punishment has been explored using ns 2 simulator here 68 See also EditPortal Internet Client to client protocol Client queue client Cultural historical activity theory CHAT Distributed Data Management Architecture End to end principle Friend to friend List of P2P protocols Peer to peer energy trading Semantic P2P networks Sharing economy SponsorChange USB dead drop Wireless ad hoc networkReferences Edit Cope James 2002 04 08 What s a Peer to Peer P2P Network Computerworld Retrieved 2021 12 21 Rudiger Schollmeier A Definition of Peer to Peer Networking for the Classification of Peer to Peer Architectures and Applications Proceedings of the First International Conference on Peer to Peer Computing IEEE 2002 Bandara H M N D A P Jayasumana 2012 Collaborative Applications over Peer to Peer Systems Challenges and Solutions Peer to Peer Networking and Applications 6 3 257 276 arXiv 1207 0790 Bibcode 2012arXiv1207 0790D doi 10 1007 s12083 012 0157 3 S2CID 14008541 a b Barkai David 2001 Peer to peer computing technologies for sharing and collaborating on the net Hillsboro OR Intel Press ISBN 978 0970284679 OCLC 49354877 Saroiu Stefan Gummadi Krishna P Gribble Steven D 2003 08 01 Measuring and analyzing the characteristics of Napster and Gnutella hosts Multimedia Systems 9 2 170 184 doi 10 1007 s00530 003 0088 1 ISSN 1432 1882 S2CID 15963045 a b Oram Andrew ed 2001 Peer to peer harnessing the benefits of a disruptive technologies Sebastopol California O Reilly ISBN 9780596001100 OCLC 123103147 RFC 1 Host Software S Crocker IETF Working Group April 7 1969 Berners Lee Tim August 1996 The World Wide Web Past Present and Future Retrieved 5 November 2011 Sandhu R Zhang X 2005 Peer to peer access control architecture using trusted computing technology Proceedings of the Tenth ACM Symposium on Access Control Models and Technologies SACMAT 05 147 158 doi 10 1145 1063979 1064005 ISBN 1595930450 S2CID 1478064 a b c d Steinmetz Ralf Wehrle Klaus 2005 2 What Is This Peer to Peer About Peer to Peer Systems and Applications Lecture Notes in Computer Science Springer Berlin Heidelberg pp 9 16 doi 10 1007 11530657 2 ISBN 9783540291923 Horton Mark and Rick Adams Standard for interchange of USENET messages 1987 1 https www hjp at doc rfc rfc1036 html Archived 2021 06 12 at the Wayback Machine Ahson Syed A Ilyas Mohammad eds 2008 SIP Handbook Services Technologies and Security of Session Initiation Protocol Taylor amp Francis p 204 ISBN 9781420066043 Zhu Ce et al eds 2010 Streaming Media Architectures Techniques and Applications Recent Advances IGI Global p 265 ISBN 9781616928339 Kamel Mina et al 2007 Optimal Topology Design for Overlay Networks In Akyildiz Ian F ed Networking 2007 Ad Hoc and Sensor Networks Wireless Networks Next Generation Internet 6th International IFIP TC6 Networking Conference Atlanta GA USA May 14 18 2007 Proceedings Springer p 714 ISBN 9783540726050 Filali Imen et al 2011 A Survey of Structured P2P Systems for RDF Data Storage and Retrieval In Hameurlain Abdelkader et al eds Transactions on Large Scale Data and Knowledge Centered Systems III Special Issue on Data and Knowledge Management in Grid and PSP Systems Springer p 21 ISBN 9783642230738 Zulhasnine Mohammed et al 2013 P2P Streaming Over Cellular Networks Issues Challenges and Opportunities In Pathan et al eds Building Next Generation Converged Networks Theory and Practice CRC Press p 99 ISBN 9781466507616 Chervenak Ann Bharathi Shishir 2008 Peer to peer Approaches to Grid Resource Discovery In Danelutto Marco et al eds Making Grids Work Proceedings of the CoreGRID Workshop on Programming Models Grid and P2P System Architecture Grid Systems Tools and Environments 12 13 June 2007 Heraklion Crete Greece Springer p 67 ISBN 9780387784489 Jin Xing Chan S H Gary 2010 Unstructured Peer to Peer Network Architectures In Shen et al eds Handbook of Peer to Peer Networking Springer p 119 ISBN 978 0 387 09750 3 a b Lv Qin et al 2002 Can Heterogeneity Make Gnutella Stable In Druschel Peter et al eds Peer to Peer Systems First International Workshop IPTPS 2002 Cambridge MA USA March 7 8 2002 Revised Papers Springer p 94 ISBN 9783540441793 Shen Xuemin Yu Heather Buford John Akon Mursalin 2009 Handbook of Peer to Peer Networking 1st ed New York Springer p 118 ISBN 978 0 387 09750 3 Typically approximating O log N where N is the number of nodes in the P2P system citation needed Other design choices include overlay rings and d Torus See for example Bandara H M N D Jayasumana A P 2012 Collaborative Applications over Peer to Peer Systems Challenges and Solutions Peer to Peer Networking and Applications 6 3 257 arXiv 1207 0790 Bibcode 2012arXiv1207 0790D doi 10 1007 s12083 012 0157 3 S2CID 14008541 R Ranjan A Harwood and R Buyya Peer to peer based resource discovery in global grids a tutorial IEEE Commun Surv vol 10 no 2 and P Trunfio Peer to Peer resource discovery in Grids Models and systems Future Generation Computer Systems archive vol 23 no 7 Aug 2007 Kelaskar M Matossian V Mehra P Paul D Parashar M 2002 A Study of Discovery Mechanisms for Peer to Peer Application pp 444 ISBN 9780769515823 Dabek Frank Zhao Ben Druschel Peter Kubiatowicz John Stoica Ion 2003 Towards a Common API for Structured Peer to Peer Overlays Peer to Peer Systems II Lecture Notes in Computer Science Vol 2735 pp 33 44 CiteSeerX 10 1 1 12 5548 doi 10 1007 978 3 540 45172 3 3 ISBN 978 3 540 40724 9 Moni Naor and Udi Wieder Novel Architectures for P2P Applications the Continuous Discrete Approach Archived 2019 12 09 at the Wayback Machine Proc SPAA 2003 Gurmeet Singh Manku Dipsea A Modular Distributed Hash Table Archived 2004 09 10 at the Wayback Machine Ph D Thesis Stanford University August 2004 Byung Gon Chun Ben Y Zhao John D Kubiatowicz 2005 02 24 Impact of Neighbor Selection on Performance and Resilience of Structured P2P Networks PDF Retrieved 2019 08 24 a href Template Cite web html title Template Cite web cite web a CS1 maint multiple names authors list link Li Deng et al 2009 Vasilakos A V et al eds An Efficient Scalable and Robust P2P Overlay for Autonomic Communication Springer p 329 ISBN 978 0 387 09752 7 Bandara H M N Dilum Jayasumana Anura P January 2012 Evaluation of P2P Resource Discovery Architectures Using Real Life Multi Attribute Resource and Query Characteristics IEEE Consumer Communications and Networking Conf CCNC 12 Korzun Dmitry Gurtov Andrei November 2012 Structured P2P Systems Fundamentals of Hierarchical Organization Routing Scaling and Security Springer ISBN 978 1 4614 5482 3 Ranjan Rajiv Harwood Aaron Buyya Rajkumar 1 December 2006 A Study on Peer to Peer Based Discovery of Grid Resource Information PDF Archived from the original PDF on 14 May 2011 Retrieved 25 August 2008 Ranjan Rajiv Chan Lipo Harwood Aaron Karunasekera Shanika Buyya Rajkumar Decentralised Resource Discovery Service for Large Scale Federated Grids PDF Archived from the original PDF on 2008 09 10 Darlagiannis Vasilios 2005 Hybrid Peer to Peer Systems In Steinmetz Ralf Wehrle Klaus eds Peer to Peer Systems and Applications Springer ISBN 9783540291923 Yang Beverly Garcia Molina Hector 2001 Comparing Hybrid Peer to Peer Systems PDF Very Large Data Bases Retrieved 8 October 2013 Padmanabhan Venkata N 1 Sripanidkulchai Kunwadee 2 2002 The Case for Cooperative Networking PostScript with addendum Lecture Notes in Computer Science Vol Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Peer to Peer Systems Cambridge MA Springer published March 2002 pp 178 doi 10 1007 3 540 45748 8 17 ISBN 978 3 540 44179 3 a href Template Cite book html title Template Cite book cite book a External link in code class cs1 code first1 and first2 code help PDF Microsoft with addendum Archived 2007 04 17 at the Wayback Machine PDF Springer original fee may be required Archived 2023 01 01 at the Wayback Machine CoopNet Cooperative Networking Microsoft Research Project home page Vu Quang H et al 2010 Peer to Peer Computing Principles and Applications Springer p 8 ISBN 978 3 642 03513 5 Vu Quang H et al 2010 Peer to Peer Computing Principles and Applications Springer pp 157 159 ISBN 978 3 642 03513 5 Goebel Jan et al 2007 Measurement and Analysis of Autonomous Spreading Malware in a University Environment In Hammerli Bernhard Markus Sommer Robin eds Detection of Intrusions and Malware and Vulnerability Assessment 4th International Conference DIMVA 2007 Lucerne Switzerland July 12 13 2007 Proceedings Springer p 112 ISBN 9783540736134 Sorkin Andrew Ross 4 May 2003 Software Bullet Is Sought to Kill Musical Piracy New York Times Retrieved 5 November 2011 Singh Vivek Gupta Himani 2012 Anonymous File Sharing in Peer to Peer System by Random Walks Technical report SRM University 123456789 9306 Lua Eng Keong Crowcroft Jon Pias Marcelo Sharma Ravi Lim Steven 2005 A survey and comparison of peer to peer overlay network schemes Archived from the original on 2012 07 24 Balakrishnan Hari Kaashoek M Frans Karger David Morris Robert Stoica Ion 2003 Looking up data in P2P systems PDF Communications of the ACM 46 2 43 48 CiteSeerX 10 1 1 5 3597 doi 10 1145 606272 606299 S2CID 2731647 Retrieved 8 October 2013 Art thou a Peer www p2pnews net 14 June 2012 Archived from the original on 6 October 2013 Retrieved 10 October 2013 Sharma P Bhakuni A amp Kaushal R Performance Analysis of BitTorrent Protocol Archived 2015 02 13 at the Wayback Machine National Conference on Communications 2013 doi 10 1109 NCC 2013 6488040 Li Jin 2008 On peer to peer P2P content delivery PDF Peer to Peer Networking and Applications 1 1 45 63 doi 10 1007 s12083 007 0003 1 S2CID 16438304 Stutzbach Daniel et al 2005 The scalability of swarming peer to peer content delivery PDF In Boutaba Raouf et al eds NETWORKING 2005 Networking Technologies Services and Protocols Performance of Computer and Communication Networks Mobile and Wireless Communications Systems Springer pp 15 26 ISBN 978 3 540 25809 4 Gareth Tyson Andreas Mauthe Sebastian Kaune Mu Mu and Thomas Plagemann Corelli A Dynamic Replication Service for Supporting Latency Dependent Content in Community Networks In Proc 16th ACM SPIE Multimedia Computing and Networking Conference MMCN San Jose CA 2009 Archived copy PDF Archived from the original PDF on 2011 04 29 Retrieved 2011 03 12 a href Template Cite web html title Template Cite web cite web a CS1 maint archived copy as title link a b Glorioso Andrea et al 2010 The Social Impact of P2P Systems In Shen et al eds Handbook of Peer to Peer Networking Springer p 48 ISBN 978 0 387 09750 3 a b John Borland April 25 2003 Judge File Swapping Tools are Legal news cnet com Archived from the original on 2012 03 10 Walker Leslie 2001 11 08 Uncle Sam Wants Napster The Washington Post Retrieved 2010 05 22 Hammerksjold Andreas Engler Narkis Delivery Optimization a deep dive Archived 2019 02 04 at the Wayback Machine Channel 9 11 October 2017 Retrieved on 4 February 2019 Krishnan R Smith M D Tang Z amp Telang R 2004 January The impact of free riding on peer to peer networks In System Sciences 2004 Proceedings of the 37th Annual Hawaii International Conference on pp 10 pp IEEE a b Feldman M Lai K Stoica I amp Chuang J 2004 May Robust incentive techniques for peer to peer networks In Proceedings of the 5th ACM conference on Electronic commerce pp 102 111 ACM Vu Quang H et al 2010 Peer to Peer Computing Principles and Applications Springer p 172 ISBN 978 3 642 03513 5 P Antoniadis and B Le Grand Incentives for resource sharing in self organized communities From economics to social psychology Digital Information Management ICDIM 07 2007 Vu Quang H et al 2010 Peer to Peer Computing Principles and Applications Springer pp 179 181 ISBN 978 3 642 03513 5 No country is free from child sexual abuse exploitation UN s top rights forum hears UN News March 3 2020 Majoras D B 2005 Peer to peer file sharing technology consumer protection and competition issues Federal Trade Commission Retrieved from http www ftc gov reports p2p05 050623p2prpt pdf Archived 2012 11 01 at the Wayback Machine The Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region 2008 Peer to peer network Retrieved from website http www infosec gov hk english technical files peer pdf Archived 2019 12 09 at the Wayback Machine Sanders Linley 2017 09 22 Illegal downloads may not actually harm sales but the European Union doesn t want you to know that Newsweek Retrieved 2018 03 29 Polgar David Ryan October 15 2017 Does Video Game Piracy Actually Result in More Sales Big Think Retrieved 2018 03 29 Orland Kyle September 26 2017 EU study finds piracy doesn t hurt game sales may actually help Ars Technica Retrieved 2018 03 29 Janko Roettgers 5 Ways to Test Whether your ISP throttles P2P http newteevee com 2008 04 02 5 ways to test if your isp throttles p2p Archived 2009 10 01 at the Wayback Machine Hjelmvik Erik John Wolfgang 2010 07 27 Breaking and Improving Protocol Obfuscation PDF Technical Report ISSN 1652 926X a b Basu A Fleming S Stanier J Naicken S Wakeman I amp Gurbani V K 2013 The state of peer to peer network simulators ACM Computing Surveys 45 4 46 A Bhakuni P Sharma R Kaushal Free rider detection and punishment in BitTorrent based P2P networks Archived 2023 01 01 at the Wayback Machine International Advanced Computing Conference 2014 doi 10 1109 IAdCC 2014 6779311External links Edit Wikimedia Commons has media related to Peer to peer Ghosh Debjani Rajan Payas Pandey Mayank P2P VoD Streaming Design Issues amp User Experience Challenges Archived 2017 02 19 at the Wayback Machine Springer Proceedings June 2014 Glossary of P2P terminology Foundation of Peer to Peer Computing Special Issue Elsevier Journal of Computer Communication Ed Javed I Khan and Adam Wierzbicki Volume 31 Issue 2 February 2008 Anderson Ross J The eternity service Pragocrypt 1996 Marling Engle amp J I Khan Vulnerabilities of P2P systems and a critical look at their solutions Archived 2007 06 15 at the Wayback Machine May 2006 Stephanos Androutsellis Theotokis and Diomidis Spinellis A survey of peer to peer content distribution technologies Archived 2020 11 09 at the Wayback Machine ACM Computing Surveys 36 4 335 371 December 2004 Biddle Peter Paul England Marcus Peinado and Bryan Willman The Darknet and the Future of Content Distribution Archived 2011 07 27 at the Wayback Machine In 2002 ACM Workshop on Digital Rights Management November 2002 John F Buford Heather Yu Eng Keong Lua P2P Networking and Applications ISBN 0123742145 Morgan Kaufmann December 2008 Djamal Eddine Meddour Mubashar Mushtaq and Toufik Ahmed Open Issues in P2P Multimedia Streaming Archived 2011 08 22 at the Wayback Machine in the proceedings of the 1st Multimedia Communications Workshop MULTICOMM 2006 held in conjunction with IEEE ICC 2006 pp 43 48 June 2006 Istanbul Turkey Detlef Schoder and Kai Fischbach Core Concepts in Peer to Peer P2P Networking Archived 2011 09 15 at the Wayback Machine In Subramanian R Goodman B eds P2P Computing The Evolution of a Disruptive Technology Idea Group Inc Hershey 2005 Ramesh Subramanian and Brian Goodman eds Peer to Peer Computing Evolution of a Disruptive Technology ISBN 1 59140 429 0 Idea Group Inc Hershey PA United States 2005 Shuman Ghosemajumder Advanced Peer Based Technology Business Models Archived 2012 10 13 at the Wayback Machine MIT Sloan School of Management 2002 Silverthorne Sean Music Downloads Pirates or Customers Archived 2006 06 30 at the Wayback Machine Harvard Business School Working Knowledge 2004 Glasnost Archived 2014 10 05 at the Wayback Machine test P2P traffic shaping Max Planck Institute for Software Systems Retrieved from https en wikipedia org w index php title Peer to peer amp oldid 1132370365, wikipedia, wiki, book, books, library,

article

, read, download, free, free download, mp3, video, mp4, 3gp, jpg, jpeg, gif, png, picture, music, song, movie, book, game, games.