Wireless Personal Communications

, Volume 107, Issue 1, pp 303–323 | Cite as

Local Contribution (LC) and Trustworthiness Factors to Induce Fairness in P2P Networks

  • Sanjeev Kumar SinghEmail author
  • Chiranjeev Kumar
  • Prem Nath


A peer-to-peer (P2P) network is a distributed system in which the autonomous peers participate at their motivation and resources are shared in distributed manner. P2P systems can be classified in two major categories: centralized and distributed. Distributed P2P systems can be further classified in two types: structured and unstructured. With immense increase in Internet, the P2P networks have found increased interest in the research community since the different protocols for these networks can be gainfully utilized in the resource discovery process for Internet related applications. However, there are several challenges in designing an efficient protocol for the P2P networks. These networks suffer from problems such as fake content distribution, free riding, whitewashing, poor search scalability, lack of a robust trust model, etc. Moreover, the peers can join and leave the network (churn) at any time which makes trust management and searching in these networks more challenging. Free riding nature of the peers damages overall performance of the P2P systems. There are several mechanisms proposed for promoting fairness in the P2P systems like tit-for-tat policy, point-based incentive policy, PageRank, Eigen Trust, layered taxation, advertisement of incentive, etc. We have observed that in some schemes like point-based incentive scheme, peers are stricken in the process of requesting data download which leads to the starvation. We have proposed a new scheme which collects the statics of resources shared by the participating peers in P2P networks and calculated local contribution and trustworthiness factors based on the statistics. The starvation problem is minimized in the proposed scheme. We have done analytical modeling and analysis of different costs involved in downloading a file with the costs in existing scheme and found that the costs involved in proposed scheme is less than the existing scheme.


Local contribution (LC) Trustworthiness Fairness P2P networks 



  1. 1.
    BitTorrent. Accessed June 2017.
  2. 2.
    Gnutella. Accessed June 2017.
  3. 3.
    British Music Rights. (2008). Music Experience and Behavior in Young People. Accessed June 2017.
  4. 4.
    Kazaa. Accessed June 2017.
  5. 5.
    Grokster. Accessed June 2017.
  6. 6.
    Stoica, I., Morris, R., Lben-Nowell, D., Karger, D. R., Kaashoek, M. F., Dabek, F., et al. (2003). Chord: A scalable peer-to-peer lookup protocol for internet applications. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (TON), 11, 17–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sylvia, R., Paul, F., Mark, H., Richard, K., & Scott, S. (2001). A scalable content addressable network. In Proceedings of 2001 conference on applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications, August 2001, San Diego, CA, USA, pp. 161–172.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gupta, I., Berman, K., Linga, P., Demers, A., & Van Renesse, R. (2003). Kelips: Building an efficient and stable P2P DHT through increased memory and background overhead. In Proceedings of 2nd international workshop on peer-to-peer systems (IPTPS 03), 2003.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wu, D., Liang, Y., He, J., & Hei, X. (2013). Balancing performance and fairness in P2P live video systems. IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video Technology, 23(6), 1029–1039.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nishida, H., & Nguyen, T. (2010). A global contribution approach to maintain fairness in P2P networks. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems, 21(6), 812–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Karakaya, M., Korpeoglu, I., & Ulusoy, Ö. (2009). Free riding in peer-to-peer networks. In Published by the IEEE computer society, March/April 2009, pp. 92–98.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ren, X.-p., Wan, J., & Xu, X.-h. (2006). A mechanism to control free-riding in P2P networks. In ICWMMN2006 proceedings.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Junfeng, T., Lidan, Y., Juan, L., & Zhongyu, L. (2009). A distributed and monitoring-based mechanism for discouraging free riding in P2P network. In 2009 computation world: Future computing, service computation, cognitive, adaptive, content, patterns, published by IEEE Computer Society, 2009, pp. 379–384.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Li, Y., Liu, Y., Xu, K., & Chen, W. (2010). Analysis and balanced mechanism on free-rider in P2P network. In Proceedings of second international conference on computer modeling and simulation 2010, published by IEEE Computer Society, 2010, pp. 462–466.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ge, T., & Manoharan, S. (2010). Mitigating free-riding on bittorrent networks. In Proceedings of fifth international conference on digital telecommunications 2010, published by IEEE Computer Society, 2010, pp. 52–56.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wang, C., & Feng, J. (2010). A study of mutual authentication for P2P trust management. In Proceedings of sixth international conference on intelligent information hiding and multimedia signal processing 2010, published by IEEE Computer Society, 2010, pp. 474–477.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Liu, Q., Qin, F., & Ge, L. (2011). Modeling and analysis of free riding in peer-to-peer streaming systems. In Proceedings of 6th international ICST conference on communications and networking in China (CHINACOM) 2011, Published by IEEE Computer Society, 2011, pp. 780–784.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sheshjavani, A. G., Akbari, B., & Ghaeini, H. R. (2016). A free-riding resiliency incentive mechanism for VoD streaming over hybrid CDN-P2P networks. In Proceedings of 8th international symposium on telecommunications (IST’2016), published by IEEE Computer Society, 2016, pp. 771–776.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Page, L., Brin, S., Motwani, R., & Winograd, T. (1998). The PageRank citation ranking: Bringing order to the web. Stanford Digital Library Technologies Project, 1998.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kamvar, S. D., Schlosser, M. T., & Garcia-Molina, H. (2003). The eigentrust algorithm for reputation management in P2P networks. In Proceedings of 12th international world wide web conference, 2003.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lin, C. S. & Cheng, Y.-C. (2009). A barter-based incentive mechanism for peer-to-peer media streaming. In Proceedings of IEEE 13th ISCE, May 2009, pp. 871–875.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tan, G., & Jarvis, S. A. (2008). A payment-based incentive and service differentiation scheme for peer-to-peer streaming broadcast. IEEE Transactions on Parallel Distributed Systems, 19(7), 940–953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wang, B. C., Chow, A. L. H., & Golubchik, L. (2012). P2P streaming: Use of advertisements as incentives. In Proceedings of 3rd MMSys, 2012, pp. 77–82.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Shi, N. & Dai, Q. (2006). A novel incentive mechanism improving peer-to-peer on-demand streaming. In Proceedings of international conference on communication, circuits system (Vol. 1, pp. 91–95).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Fan, B., Lui, J. C. S., & Chiu, D.-M. (2009). The design trade-offs of bittorrent-like file sharing protocols. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 17(2), 365–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sherman, A., Nieh, J., & Stein, C. (2012). FairTorrent: A deficit-based distributed algorithm to ensure fairness in peer-to-peer systems. IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking, 20(5), 1361–1374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hwang, I. S., & Liem, A. T. (2013). Hybrid scalable peer-to-peer IP-based multimedia services architecture in ethernet passive optical networks. Journal of Lightwave Technology, 31(2), 213–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Mármol, F. G., Pérez, G. M., & Skarmeta, A. F. G. (2009). TACS, a trust model for P2P networks. Wireless Personal Communications, 51(1), 153–164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kim, S. (2014). Repeated public goods game mode for trust based P2P networks. Wireless Personal Communications, 79(1), 473–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Venkadeshan, R., & Chandrasekar, M. (2016). Effective communication in P2P network by introducing GOSIP–PHE algorithms. Wireless Personal Communications, 87(3), 923–937.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sanjeev Kumar Singh
    • 1
    Email author
  • Chiranjeev Kumar
    • 1
  • Prem Nath
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer Science and EngineeringIndian Institute of Technology (ISM)DhanbadIndia
  2. 2.Department of Computer EngineeringMizoram UniversityAizawlIndia

Personalised recommendations