Interest-Based Peer-to-Peer Group Management

  • Jun Lei
  • Xiaoming Fu
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 5630)


Peer-to-Peer systems become popular applications but suffer from insufficient resource availability which is caused by free-riders and inefficient lookup algorithms. To address the first cause, a number of recent works have focused on providing appropriate incentive mechanisms to encourage participants to contribute their resources to the P2P systems. To improve the lookup efficiency, locality-awareness has been introduced into the research community. However, existing proposals attempt to optimize the service performance during the data transmission period mostly after performing the neighboring lookup, which cannot address the fundamental concern of reducing lookup traffic.

Therefore, this paper proposes interest-based peer-to-peer management (IPM) protocol to facilitate the peering lookup. Our design philosophy differs from existing work that IPM is a client-only approach and can be represented as either an alternative or a complementary to current proposals. With additional locality-awareness considerations, IPM can reduce the lookup overhead while optimizing the system performance. The simulation results essentially state that IPM can largely improve the efficiency and reliability of P2P media distribution systems through reducing control overhead by 50% on average and reduces average packet loss rate up to 34.7%.


Peer-to-Peer protocol interest lookup 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Cohen, P.: Incentives build robustness in bittorent. In: 1st Workshop on the Economics of Peer-2-Peer Systems, Berkley, CA (2003)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Stocia, I., Morris, R., Karger, D., Kaashoek, M.F., Balakrishnan, H.: Chord: A Scalable Peer-to-peer Lookup Service for Internet Applications. In: ACM SIGCOMM (2001)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    Do, T., Hua, K., Tantaoui, M.: P2vod: providing fault tolerant video-on-demand streaming in peer-to-peer environment. In: Proceedings of IEEE ICC 2004, Paris, France (2004)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Guha, S., Daswani, N., Jaine, R.: Peer-assisted vod: Making internet video distribution cheap. In: Proceedings IPTPS 2007 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Chu, Y.-H., Rao, S.-G., Zhang, H.: A case for End System Multicast. In: ACM Special Interest Group Performance Evaluation, SIGMETRICS (2000)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ripeanu, M., Foster, I., Iamnitchi, A.: Mapping the Gnutella network: Properties of large-scale peer-to-peer systems and implications for system design. IEEE Internet Computing Journal 6 (2002)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhu, Y., Hu, Y.: Enhancing Search Performance on Gnutella-Like P2P Systems. IEEE Transactions on Parallel and Distributed Systems (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Jun, S., Ahamad, M.: Incentives in BitTorrent Induces Free Riding. In: ACM SIGCOMM 2005 (2005)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Park, K., Pack, S., Kwon, T.: Climber: An Incentive-based Resilient Peer-to-Peer System for Live Streaming Services. In: The 7th International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems, IPTPS (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Freedman, M.-J., Aperjis, C., Johari, R.: Prices are Right: Managing resources and incentives in peer-assisted content distribution. In: The 7th International Workshop on Peer-to-Peer Systems, IPTPS (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Xie, H., Yang, Y.R.: P4P: Provider Portal for Applications. In: ACM SIGCOMM (2008)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Choffnes, D.R., Bustamante, F.E.: Taming the Torrent: A Practical Approach to Reducing Cross-ISP Traffic in P2P Systems. In: ACM SIGCOMM (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lei, J., Shi, L., Fu, X.: An Experimental Analysis of Joost Peer-to-Peer VoD Service, Technical Report No. IFI-TB-2007-03, Institute for Computer Science, University of Goettingen, Germany, ISSN 1611-1044 (2007)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kim, S., Fox, E.-A.: Interest-based User Grouping Model for Collaborative Filtering in Digital Libraries. In: Chen, Z., Chen, H., Miao, Q., Fu, Y., Fox, E., Lim, E.-p. (eds.) ICADL 2004. LNCS, vol. 3334, pp. 533–542. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chiou, H., Su, A., Yang, S.: Interest-Based Peer Selection in P2P Network. In: IEEE SUTC, pp. 549–554 (2008)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Aggarwal, V., Feldman, A., Scheideler, C.: Can ISPs and P2P Users Cooperate for Improved Performance? ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review 37(3) (2007)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bindal, R., Cao, P., Chan, W., Medved, J., Suwala, G., Bates, T., Zhang, A.: Improving traffic locality in BitTorrent via biased neighbor selection. In: International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems, ICDCS (2006)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
  21. 21.
    Hei, X., Liang, C., Liu, Y., Ross, K.: A Measurement Study of a Large-scale P2P IPTV System. IEEE Transactions on Multimedia 9(8), 1672–1687 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Herrera, O., Znati, T.: Modeling Churn in P2P Networks. In: Simulation Symposium (2007)Google Scholar
  23. 23.

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jun Lei
    • 1
  • Xiaoming Fu
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Computer ScienceUniversity of GöttingenGöttingenGermany

Personalised recommendations