Public and private BitT orrent communities: A measurement study M. - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
public and private bitt orrent communities a measurement
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Public and private BitT orrent communities: A measurement study M. - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Dec 28, 2022 135 likes •351 views

Public and private BitT orrent communities: A measurement study M. Meulpolder, L. DAcunto, M. Capot, M. Wojciechowski, J.A. Pouwelse, D.H.J. Epema, H.J. Sips Delft University of Technology Challenge the future PDS group BitTorrent

slide-1
SLIDE 1

Challenge the future

Delft University of Technology

Public and private BitT

  • rrent communities:

A measurement study

  • M. Meulpolder, L. D’Acunto, M. Capotă, M. Wojciechowski,

J.A. Pouwelse, D.H.J. Epema, H.J. Sips

slide-2
SLIDE 2

2/20

PDS group

BitTorrent measurements IPTPS 2005 Tribler

  • Gossiping – BuddyCast
  • Reputation – BarterCast

Swift – swarming transport protocol The Peer-to-Peer Trace Archive

  • http://p2pta.ewi.tudelft.nl

P2P-Next QLectives

  • Quality in Techno-Social Systems Workshop

http://qlectives.eu/qteso

slide-3
SLIDE 3

3/20

BitTorrent communities

Thousands of content discovery sites Communities

  • User accounts
  • Comments
  • Ratings
  • Forums

Private communities

  • Membership required
  • Difficult to measure
slide-4
SLIDE 4

4/20

Motivation and goal

Are there differences between the two community designs, public and private? We measure:

  • Download speed
  • Connectability
  • Seeder/leecher ratio
  • Seeding duration
slide-5
SLIDE 5

5/20

Outline

Sharing enforcement policies Measured communities Experimental setup Measurement results Conclusions

slide-6
SLIDE 6

6/20

Sharing enforcement policies

Make users seed Community-level accounting

  • Above tit-for-tat
  • Penalties up to account removal

Torrent-level policy

  • Prevents hit-and-run behavior
slide-7
SLIDE 7

7/20

Measured communities

Public

  • ThePirateBay
  • EZTV

Private

  • TVTorrents
  • Flexible accounting
  • TorrentLeech
  • Torrent-level accounting
  • PolishTracker
  • Strictest sharing enforcement policy
slide-8
SLIDE 8

8/20

1 2 3

Instrumented BitTorrent client

Experimental setup

4

Logging

slide-9
SLIDE 9

9/20

Measurement details

September to December 2009 Over 500 000 users Over 400 torrents Over 20 million bitfields

slide-10
SLIDE 10

10/20

Download speed

Public Private

slide-11
SLIDE 11

11/20

Download speed

Public Private

3-5x faster median download speed

slide-12
SLIDE 12

12/20

Download speed

  • Vs. previous results

Guo, IMC 2005

  • 160 kbit/s mean

Pouwelse, IPTPS 2005

  • 240 kbit/s mean

Iosup, CCGRID 2006

  • 500 kbit/s mean

Mean (kbit/s) ThePirateBay 1037 EZTV 928 TVTorrents 3590 TorrentLeech 4937 PolishTracker 8625

slide-13
SLIDE 13

13/20

Connectability

slide-14
SLIDE 14

14/20

Connectability

Up to 50% better connectability

slide-15
SLIDE 15

15/20

Connectability

  • Vs. previous results

Pouwelse, IPTPS 2005

  • 40% overall

Mol, P2P 2008

  • 66% for ThePirateBay
  • 45% for TVTorrents

Xie, ICPP 2007, CoolStreaming

  • 70%

Mean (% all) ThePirateBay 47.0 EZTV 48.3 TVTorrents 32.5 TorrentLeech 33.9 PolishTracker 20.6

slide-16
SLIDE 16

16/20

Seeder/leecher ratio

slide-17
SLIDE 17

17/20

Seeder/leecher ratio

At least 10x higher ratio

slide-18
SLIDE 18

18/20

Seeding duration

1 min

slide-19
SLIDE 19

19/20

Seeding duration

  • Vs. previous results

Pouwelse, IPTPS 2005

  • 83% < 1 h

Guo, IMC 2005

  • 8% > 1 day

Andrade, Computer Networks 2009

  • 50% < 5 h
slide-20
SLIDE 20

20/20

Conclusion

Private vs. public

  • Speed is 3-5 times faster
  • Connectability is 50% better
  • Seeder/leecher ratio is 10x higher
  • Seeding duration is much longer
  • Vs. previous work, public results are

similar, private significantly better

Given the seeding measured, how important is tit-for-tat?