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 application. They are said to form a peer-to-peer network of nodes.
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.[1] Peers are both suppliers and consumers of resources, in contrast to the traditional client–server model where only servers supply, and clients consume.
The peer-to-peer application structure was popularized by file sharing systems like Napster. The concept has inspired new structures and philosophies in many areas of human interaction. Peer-to-peer networking is not restricted to technology, but covers also social processes with a peer-to-peer dynamic. In such context, social peer-to-peer processes are currently emerging throughout society.
Contents
[hide]
• 1 Architecture of P2P systems
o 1.1 Structured systems
1.1.1 Distributed hash tables
o 1.2 Unstructured systems
o 1.3 Indexing and resource discovery
• 2 Peer-to-peer-like systems
• 3 Advantages and weaknesses
• 4 Social and economic impact
• 5 Applications
o 5.1 Content delivery
o 5.2 Networking
o 5.3 Science
o 5.4 Search
o 5.5 Communications networks
o 5.6 General
o 5.7 Miscellaneous
• 6 Historical perspective
• 7 Network neutrality controversy
• 8 See also
• 9 References
• 10 External links
[edit] Architecture of P2P systems
Peer-to-peer systems often implement an abstract overlay network, built at Application Layer, on top of the native or physical network topology. Such overlays are used for indexing and peer discovery and make the P2P system independent from the physical network topology. Content is typically exchanged directly over the underlying Internet Protocol (IP) network. Anonymous peer-to-peer systems are an exception, and implement extra routing layers to obscure the identity of the source or destination of queries.
In structured peer-to-peer networks, peers (and, sometimes, resources) are organized following specific criteria and algorithms, which lead to overlays with specific topologies and properties. They typically use distributed hash table-based (DHT) indexing, such as in the Chord system (MIT).[2]
Unstructured peer-to-peer networks do not provide any algorithm for organization or optimization of network connections.[citation needed]. In particular, three models of unstructured architecture are defined. In pure peer-to-peer systems the entire network consists solely of equipotent peers. There is only one routing layer, as there are no preferred nodes with any special infrastructure function. Hybrid peer-to-peer systems allow such infrastructure nodes to exist, often called supernodes.[3] In centralized peer-to-peer systems, a central server is used for indexing functions and to bootstrap the entire system.[citation needed]. Although this has similarities with a structured architecture, the connections between peers are not determined by any algorithm. The first prominent and popular peer-to-peer file sharing system, Napster, was an example of the centralized model. Gnutella and Freenet, on the other hand, are examples of the decentralized model. Kazaa is an example of the hybrid model.
P2P networks are typically used for connecting nodes via largely ad hoc connections.[citation needed] Data, including digital formats such as audio files, and real time data such as telephony traffic, is passed using P2P technology.
A pure P2P network does not have the notion of clients or servers but only equal peer nodes that simultaneously function 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 does not use the P2P 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.
The P2P overlay network consists of all the participating peers as network nodes. There are links between any two nodes that know each other: i.e. if a participating peer knows the location of another peer in the P2P network, then there is a directed edge from the former node to the latter in the overlay network. Based on how the nodes in the overlay network are linked to each other, we can classify the P2P networks as unstructured or structured.
[edit] Structured systems
Structured P2P networks employ a globally consistent protocol to ensure that any node can efficiently route a search to some peer that has the desired file, even if the file is extremely rare. Such a guarantee necessitates a more structured pattern of overlay links. By far the most common type of structured P2P network is the distributed hash table (DHT), in which a variant of consistent hashing is used to assign ownership of each file to a particular peer, in a way analogous to a traditional hash table's assignment of each key to a particular array slot.
[edit] Distributed hash tables
Main article: Distributed hash table
Distributed hash tables
Distributed hash tables (DHTs) are a class of decentralized distributed systems that provide a lookup service similar to a hash table: (key, value) pairs are stored in the DHT, and any participating node can efficiently retrieve the value associated with a given key. Responsibility for maintaining the mapping from keys to values is distributed among the nodes, in such a way that a change in the set of participants causes a minimal amount of disruption. This allows DHTs to scale to extremely large numbers of nodes and to handle continual node arrivals, departures, and failures.
DHTs form an infrastructure that can be used to build peer-to-peer networks. Notable distributed networks that use DHTs include BitTorrent's distributed tracker, the Kad network, the Storm botnet, YaCy, and the Coral Content Distribution Network.
Some prominent research projects include the Chord project, the PAST storage utility, the P-Grid, a self-organized and emerging overlay network and the CoopNet content distribution system (see below for external links related to these projects).
DHT-based networks have been widely utilized for accomplishing efficient resource discovery[4][5] for grid computing systems, as it aids in resource management and scheduling of applications. Resource discovery activity involves searching for the appropriate resource types that match the user’s application requirements. Recent advances in the domain of decentralized resource discovery have been based on extending the existing DHTs with the capability of multi-dimensional data organization and query routing. Majority of the efforts have looked at embedding spatial database indices such as the Space Filling Curves (SFCs) including the Hilbert curves, Z-curves, k-d tree, MX-CIF Quad tree and R*-tree for managing, routing, and indexing of complex Grid resource query objects over DHT networks. Spatial indices are well suited for handling the complexity of Grid resource queries. Although some spatial indices can have issues as regards to routing load-balance in case of a skewed data set, all the spatial indices are more scalable in terms of the number of hops traversed and messages generated while searching and routing Grid resource queries.
[edit] Unstructured systems
An unstructured P2P network is formed when the overlay links are established arbitrarily. Such networks can be easily constructed as a new peer that wants to join the network can copy existing links of another node and then form its own links over time. In an unstructured P2P network, if a peer wants to find a desired piece of data in the network, the query has to be flooded through the network to find as many peers as possible that share the data. The main disadvantage with such networks is that the queries may not always be resolved. 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. 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. Flooding also causes a high amount of signaling traffic in the network and hence such networks typically have very poor search efficiency. Many of the popular P2P networks are unstructured.
In pure P2P networks: Peers act as equals, merging the roles of clients and server. In such networks, there is no central server managing the network, neither is there a central router. Some examples of pure P2P Application Layer networks designed for peer-to-peer file sharing are Gnutella (pre v0.4) and Freenet.
There also exist hybrid P2P systems, which distribute their clients into two groups: client nodes and overlay nodes. Typically, each client is able to act according to the momentary need of the network and can become part of the respective overlay network used to coordinate the P2P structure. This division between normal and 'better' nodes is done in order to address the scaling problems on early pure P2P networks. Examples for such networks are for example Gnutella (after v0.4) or G2.
Another type of hybrid P2P network are networks using on the one hand central server(s) or bootstrapping mechanisms, on the other hand P2P for their data transfers. These networks are in general called 'centralized networks' because of their lack of ability to work without their central server(s). An example for such a network is the eDonkey network (eD2k).
[edit] Indexing and resource discovery
Older peer-to-peer networks duplicate resources across each node in the network configured to carry that type of information. This allows local searching, but requires much traffic.
Modern networks use central coordinating servers and directed search requests. Central servers are typically used for listing potential peers (Tor), coordinating their activities (Folding@home), and searching (Napster, eMule). Decentralized searching was first done by flooding search requests out across peers. More efficient directed search strategies, including supernodes and distributed hash tables, are now used.
Many P2P systems use stronger peers (super-peers, super-nodes) as servers and client-peers are connected in a star-like fashion to a single super-peer.
[edit] Peer-to-peer-like systems
In modern definitions of peer-to-peer technology, the term implies the general architectural concepts outlined in this article. However, 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.[6]
A distributed messaging system that is often likened as an early peer-to-peer architecture is the USENET network news system that is in principle a client–server model from the user or client perspective, when they read or post news articles. 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 e-mail clients and their direct connections is strictly a client–server relationship. Tim Berners-Lee's vision for the World Wide Web, as evidenced by his WorldWideWeb editor/browser, was close to a peer-to-peer design 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. This contrasts to the broadcasting-like structure of the web as it has developed over the years.
[edit] Advantages and weaknesses
In P2P networks, clients provide resources, which may include bandwidth, storage space, and computing power. As nodes arrive and demand on the system increases, the total capacity of the system also increases. 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.
The distributed nature of P2P networks also increases robustness,[citation needed] by—in pure P2P systems—enabling peers to find the data without relying on a centralized index server[citation needed]. In the latter case, there is no single point of failure in the system.[citation needed]
As with most network systems, unsecure and unsigned codes may allow remote access to files on a victim's computer or even compromise the entire network.[citation needed] In the past this has happened for example to the FastTrack network when anti P2P companies managed to introduce faked chunks into downloads and downloaded files (mostly MP3 files) were unusable afterwards or even contained malicious code.[citation needed] 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.
Internet service providers (ISPs) have been known to throttle P2P file-sharing traffic due to the high-bandwidth usage.[7] 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. 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.[8]
A possible solution to this is called P2P caching, where a ISP stores the part of files most accessed by P2P clients in order to save access to the Internet.
[edit] Social and economic impact
Main article: Peer-to-peer (meme)
The concept of P2P is increasingly evolving to an expanded usage as the relational dynamic active in distributed networks, i.e., not just computer to computer, but human to human. Yochai Benkler has coined the term commons-based peer production to denote collaborative projects such as free and open source software and Wikipedia. Associated with peer production are the concepts of:
• peer governance (referring to the manner in which peer production projects are managed)
• peer property (referring to the new type of licenses which recognize individual authorship but not exclusive property rights, such as the GNU General Public License and the Creative Commons licenses)
• peer distribution (or the manner in which products, particularly peer-produced products, are distributed)
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 peer-to-peer systems should be seen both as a goal and a means for self-organized virtual communities to be built and fostered.[9] 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.
Abstract
Wireless mesh networks are a promising area for the deployment of new wireless communication and networking technologies. In this paper, we address the problem of enabling effective peer-to-peer resource sharing in this type of networks. Starting from the well-known Chord protocol for resource sharing in wired networks, we propose a specialization that accounts for peculiar features of wireless mesh networks: namely, the availability of a wireless infrastructure, and the 1-hop broadcast nature of wireless communication, which bring to the notions of location awareness and MAC layer cross-layering. Through extensive packet-level simulations, we investigate the separate effects of location awareness and MAC layer cross-layering, and of their combination, on the performance of the P2P application. The combined protocol, MeshChord, reduces message overhead of as much as 40 percent with respect to the basic Chord design, while at the same time improving the information retrieval performance. Notably, differently from the basic Chord design, our proposed MeshChord specialization displays information retrieval performance resilient to the presence of both CBR and TCP background traffic. Overall, the results of our study suggest that MeshChord can be successfully utilized for implementing file/resource sharing applications in wireless mesh networks.
