DOCSLIB.ORG

Increasing Bittorrent Content Availability

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Increasing Bittorrent Content Availability Partial Swarm Merger: Increasing BitTorrent content availability Antonio´ Homem Ferreira∗, Ricardo Lopes Pereira∗ and Fernando M. Silva∗ ∗INESC-ID / Instituto Superior Tecnico´ Email: fantonio.h.ferreira,[email protected], [email protected] Abstract—The BitTorrent Peer-to-Peer (P2P) file sharing pro- covers an hash of each piece of the content and the names of tocol is a popular way to distribute digital content. It’s a the files being shared. This means that, even if two torrent files very scalable protocol, where the entry of new peers increases represent the exact same content, just by changing the name the total capacity of the network, especially after peers have finished their download and remain just as uploaders (known as of one of the files being shared (e.g. adding the team name seeders). Through the monitoring of live Internet swarms we have to the file’s name), the two files will generate two different discovered that there is a significant amount of repeated content infohashes and thus result in two different swarms that do not being shared. Various publishers tend to publish the same content share any data with each other. The same will happen if a new through different torrent files, creating independent swarms that file (e.g. a subtitles file for another language) is appended. end up having the exact same content or a large number of common parts. As such the size of each swarm is smaller than This study shows that this competition among teams results it could be, should there be only one swarm for that content. in the existence of different swarms, sharing the same or This affects the performance of BitTorrent and diminishes the similar content but isolated from each other and discusses opportunities for exploiting locality. how this affects the performance of BitTorrent. We propose By analyzing 3067 swarms, we concluded that there is a significant amount of common content between different swarms. that content availability can be improved by combining these This redundancy can be exploited in order to increase data different swarms into a larger one. These swarms can be found availability and source diversity. We propose a novel technique, by comparing information inside each torrent file: the hash called Partial Swarm Merger, which adds a new component string of each piece as well as the piece size and overall file to the BitTorrent infrastructure, allowing peers to learn about size. With this information, it can be determined if the different swarms with common content. With this information, peers could combine the different swarms, announcing and requesting from swarms share the same content or, at least, if they share a high each swarm the pieces in common with their download. This will number of identical pieces. increase the availability of the parts which are common to the The data for this study was obtained by analysing torrent several swarms. files and gathering information on the associated swarms. The I. INTRODUCTION latter was performed using an instrumented BitTorrent client application running on several PlanetLab [3] nodes. Based on In the last few years, Peer-to-Peer (P2P) communication this data, we propose a solution called Partial Swarm Merger has increased exponentially [1] proving to be one of the (PSM) as an efficient way to exploit the content redundancy. most successful architectures for providing a number of ser- This solution would be based on a service outside the BitTor- vices like VoIP, video streaming and of course file sharing. rent network and would not require any modifications to the One of the most successful and popular P2P protocols is BitTorrent protocol. However, BitTorrent client applications BitTorrent[2] which represents most of the P2P traffic gener- would need an extension in order to use the service. ated worldwide[1]. BitTorrent presents no infrastructure costs beyond the residential grade Internet connection supported by PSM could also be used in other scenarios. A GNU/Linux each user. As such, it is very affordable and convenient for a distribution could arrange common, non architecture specific, user to put his content online to be shared. files into the first pieces, placing architecture specific binaries The low barrier of entry for publishing content has enabled at the end, allowing peers downloading versions for differ- many to publish the works of others. Although anyone can ent architectures to share the common pieces. A software publish content for sharing, users tend to download the content distributer could also package common library files used by from sources they trust. These sources are usually groups different software products in the first positions as to be shared of individuals (publisher teams) that have made a reputation among peers downloading different products. for themselves by competing with each other to be the first This paper is organized as follows: Section II presents the group to publish a specific content. This competition between BitTorrent protocol, focusing on the publishing mechanism groups often results in the creation and publishing of different and the torrent file. We present our methodology for swarm torrent files that represent the same or very similar content. monitoring in Section III and in Section IV we discuss the This fact is a source of redundancy which is not exploited by results of the study. Partial Swarm Merger is detailed in the conventional BitTorrent protocol. In BitTorrent, swarms Section V. Finally, Section VI discusses the related work and are identified by an infohash which is an SHA1 hash which Section VII presents the final conclusions. 2 II. BITTORRENT PROTOCOL III. SWARM MONITORING In this section, we will first describe how the torrent files Before presenting the work described in this paper, we were collected. Then we will present our methodology for provide a brief review of the BitTorrent protocol, focusing analyzing and comparing files in order to determine redundant on the publishing method and the torrent file. content. BitTorrent is a P2P protocol for file sharing where peers The first step in this study was the download of the share files among themselves, supporting the upload costs. BitTorrent torrent files. The files were obtained through a Rich Unlike other file-sharing P2P protocols such as eMule1 or Site Summary (RSS) reader script that read RSS feeds from Kazaa2, BitTorrent doesn’t provide any mechanism for file PirateBay3, isohunt4 and btjunkie5 and downloaded the files search. Its goal is just exchange and replication of files. This in each feed. The RSS feeds were followed from 25th of April means that all file searches are done outside the network. There 2011 to 12th of June 2011. The torrent database was primed are two main components on the BitTorrent protocol: with Piratebay’s one hundred most popular files on April 25th and complemented with isohunt’s twenty most popular files 1) Tracker: Provides a list of peers sharing a given file. Can for each major category (audio, tv and video) on May 24th. also receive and log information about upload/download During the same period, an instrumented version of Bit- rates and other details for statistical purposes. 6 2) Peers: Share a given file among themselves. There are Tornado (a python BitTorrent client) , ran on a number two types of peers: the ones that have already finished of PlanetLab nodes, reading the torrent files and querying the download of the file, called seeders, and the ones corresponding trackers to obtain peer related information such still downloading the file, called leechers. as swarm size, number of leechers and number of seeders. BitTornado was used to query trackers for peers with inter- To share a file a peer needs to create a torrent file and publish vals of approximately 20 minutes. The application was also it. This file contains meta-information like: (1) file names and modified in order to not download the content pertaining to sizes, (2) tracker(s) Uniform Resource Locator (URL), (3) the the torrent files. The results for swarm size don’t include hashes for each file part (piece) and the fixed piece size, (4) the PlanetLab nodes used. A swarm stopped being monitored comments, creation date, encoding and other information on when the number of peers dropped below 30 and the number the content and files. After publishing the torrent file, usually of seeders dropped to 0 for a period of a week. in a webpage, interested users can download and open it with To determine which torrent files represented the same con- a BitTorrent client application. This application reads the file tent or at least very similar content, the torrent files (metainfo) and queries the tracker for a list of active peers for that same were compared based on the following similarity criteria (in file. After receiving the list, it connects to the peers and starts order): downloading the file. All file distribution is done between 1) Piece size - In order to be able to compare pieces’ hash peers. Trackers don’t get involved in the file sharing process. values, it is necessary for the pieces of both torrent file Peers exchange blocks of data from a data aggregate which to have the same length; contains one of more files concatenated. The exchange unit 2) Overall content size - torrent files were only compared if is the piece, which has a fixed size. Each piece is associated either both had the same size or their sizes were within with a SHA1 hash, found in the torrent file, used to verify a margin of 5% of each other; its integrity. After downloading and verifying the hash, a peer 3) Pieces’ hash value - For two pieces to be considered informs every peer connected to it that it already has that as corresponding to the exact same content, their hash piece available for upload.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • From Sony to SOPA: the Technology-Content Divide
    From Sony to SOPA: The Technology-Content Divide The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation John Palfrey, Jonathan Zittrain, Kendra Albert, and Lisa Brem, From Sony to SOPA: The Technology-Content Divide, Harvard Law School Case Studies (2013). Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:11029496 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Open Access Policy Articles, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#OAP http://casestudies.law.harvard.edu By John Palfrey, Jonathan Zittrain, Kendra Albert, and Lisa Brem February 23, 2013 From Sony to SOPA: The Technology-Content Divide Background Note Copyright © 2013 Harvard University. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, used in a spreadsheet, or transmitted in any form or by any means – electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise – without permission. "There was a time when lawyers were on one side or the other of the technology content divide. Now, the issues are increasingly less black-and-white and more shades of gray. You have competing issues for which good lawyers provide insights on either side." — Laurence Pulgram, partner, Fenwick & Westi Since the invention of the printing press, there has been tension between copyright holders, who seek control over and monetary gain from their creations, and technology builders, who want to invent without worrying how others might use that invention to infringe copyrights.
    [Show full text]
  • A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of The
    A Framework for Application Specific Knowledge Engines Item Type text; Electronic Dissertation Authors Lai, Guanpi Publisher The University of Arizona. Rights Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. Download date 25/09/2021 03:58:57 Link to Item http://hdl.handle.net/10150/204290 A FRAMEWORK FOR APPLICATION SPECIFIC KNOWLEDGE ENGINES by Guanpi Lai _____________________ A Dissertation Submitted to the Faculty of the DEPARTMENT OF SYSTEMS AND INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements For the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY In the Graduate College THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA 2010 2 THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA GRADUATE COLLEGE As members of the Dissertation Committee, we certify that we have read the dissertation prepared by Guanpi Lai entitled A Framework for Application Specific Knowledge Engines and recommend that it be accepted as fulfilling the dissertation requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy _______________________________________________________________________ Date: 4/28/2010 Fei-Yue Wang _______________________________________________________________________ Date: 4/28/2010 Ferenc Szidarovszky _______________________________________________________________________ Date: 4/28/2010 Jian Liu Final approval and acceptance of this dissertation is contingent
    [Show full text]
  • International Intellectual Property Alliance®
    I NTERNATIONAL I NTELLECTUAL P ROPERTY A LLIANCE® 1818 N STREET, NW, 8TH FLOOR · WASHINGTON, DC 20036 · TEL (202) 355-7924 · FAX (202) 355-7899 · WWW.IIPA.COM · EMAIL: [email protected] September 14, 2012 Filed via www.regulations.gov, Docket No. USTR–2012–0011 Stanford K. McCoy, Esq. Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Intellectual Property and Innovation Office of the U.S. Trade Representative Washington, DC 20508 Re: IIPA Written Submission Re: 2012 Special 301 Out-of-Cycle Review of Notorious Markets: Request for Public Comments, 77 Fed. Reg. 48583 (August 14, 2012) Dear Mr. McCoy: In response to the August 14, 2012 Federal Register notice referenced above, the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA)1 provides the Special 301 Subcommittee with the following written comments to provide examples of Internet and physical “notorious markets” – those “where counterfeit or pirated products are prevalent to such a degree that the market exemplifies the problem of marketplaces that deal in infringing goods and help sustain global piracy and counterfeiting.” We hope our filing will assist the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) in “identifying potential Internet and physical notorious markets that exist outside the United States and that may be included in the 2012 Notorious Markets List.” We express appreciation to USTR for publishing a notorious markets list as an “Out of Cycle Review” separately from the annual Special 301 Report. This list has successfully identified key online and physical marketplaces that are involved in intellectual property rights infringements, and has led to some positive developments. These include closures of some Internet websites whose businesses were built on illegal conduct, greater cooperation from some previously identified “notorious” and other suspect sites, and the facilitation of licensing agreements for legitimate distribution of creative materials.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Search Engines
    A blog network is a group of blogs that are connected to each other in a network. A blog network can either be a group of loosely connected blogs, or a group of blogs that are owned by the same company. The purpose of such a network is usually to promote the other blogs in the same network and therefore increase the advertising revenue generated from online advertising on the blogs.[1] List of search engines From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia For knowing popular web search engines see, see Most popular Internet search engines. This is a list of search engines, including web search engines, selection-based search engines, metasearch engines, desktop search tools, and web portals and vertical market websites that have a search facility for online databases. Contents 1 By content/topic o 1.1 General o 1.2 P2P search engines o 1.3 Metasearch engines o 1.4 Geographically limited scope o 1.5 Semantic o 1.6 Accountancy o 1.7 Business o 1.8 Computers o 1.9 Enterprise o 1.10 Fashion o 1.11 Food/Recipes o 1.12 Genealogy o 1.13 Mobile/Handheld o 1.14 Job o 1.15 Legal o 1.16 Medical o 1.17 News o 1.18 People o 1.19 Real estate / property o 1.20 Television o 1.21 Video Games 2 By information type o 2.1 Forum o 2.2 Blog o 2.3 Multimedia o 2.4 Source code o 2.5 BitTorrent o 2.6 Email o 2.7 Maps o 2.8 Price o 2.9 Question and answer .
    [Show full text]
  • Searching for Malware in Bittorrent∗
    Searching for Malware in BitTorrent∗ Andrew D. Berns and Eunjin (EJ) Jung April 24, 2008 Abstract One of the most widely publicized aspects of computer security has been the presence and propagation of malware. Malware has adapted to many different changing technologies, in- cluding recently-popular P2P systems. While previous work has examined P2P networks and protocols like KaZaA and Gnutella for malware, little has been done so far that examines BitTor- rent. This project explored BitTorrent for the presence of malware, and discovered a significant portion of malware in the downloaded file set. Statistics on torrents infected with malware were gathered and analyzed to find patterns that are helpful in creating basic filtering heuristics. While these heuristics may work in simple cases, several easy ways they can be defeated were found. 1 Introduction Recently, peer-to-peer networks have emerged as a popular paradigm for Internet applications. In fact, a study in 2005 estimated that P2P traffic accounted for around 70% of all traffic on the Internet [2]. P2P technology is finding new applications as it grows, including voice-over-IP systems and streaming video delivery. While P2P has found several different uses, perhaps the most widely-known use is for file sharing. One concern with P2P file sharing is that it can be used to distribute malware (malicious software, such as worms, viruses, and rootkits). On the one hand, users have access to huge amounts of data, while on the other hand, this data can easily be tainted with viruses, worms, and other forms of malware. An important consideration, then, is if the concern about malware in P2P networks is warranted, and if it is, are there ways to protect a computer and minimize the risk of malware infection from P2P networks.
    [Show full text]
  • The Blocking of File Appropriate Tool, Or a Fruitless Effort to Saf E Blocking Of
    Name: Samaa Kanani ANR: 672673 Supervisor: M. Schellekens Program: Law and Technology LLM Word count: [13723 ] Master Thesis The blocking of file -sharing websites by ISPs – an appropriate tool, or a fruitless effort to safeguard copyrights? 1 INTRODUCTION 3 1.1 PIRACY 4 1.1.1 WHAT IS BIT TORRENT ? 5 1.2 PIRACY IN THE NETHERLANDS 6 2 – THE REASON BEHIND PEOPLES DOWNLOADING BEHAVIOR 10 2.1 FILESHARING 2©12 REPORT 10 2.2 CORE DATA REPORT 12 2.2.1 TV-SHOWS 12 2.2.2 MOVIES 12 2.2.3 MUSIC 13 2.3 ATTITUDE TOWARDS ONLINE PIRACY SURVEY (ATOPS) 14 2.3.1 FINDINGS OF ATOPS 15 2.3.2 ASSESSING THE THREE MAIN REASONS FOR PIRATING MEDIA CONTENT 19 2.3.3 ATTITUDE TOWARDS LEGAL DOWNLOADS AS AN ALTERNATIVE 20 3 BREIN V ZIGGO & XS4ALL 22 3.1 CASE SUMMARY 22 4 APPROPRIATENESS OF BREIN V ZIGGO/XS4ALL 25 4.1 PROPORTIONALITY 25 4.2 SUBSIDIARITY 27 4.3 EFFECTIVENESS 29 5. ALTERNATIVES TO ILLEGAL DOWNLOADING 34 5.2 (M ICRO ) DONATIONS 34 5.3 CROWD FUNDING 35 5.4 PRIVATE COPYING LEVY 35 6 CONCLUDING REMARKS 37 WORKS CITED 39 2 1 Introduction The Internet has changed the way in which people obtain and consume information. It has also created new and easy ways for media to be accessed. But this ability to access media content over the Internet, also gave rise to online piracy. Copyrights holders are often hindered from fully exercising their copyrights, since their materials are being distributed illegally online. In recent years, the courts have seen an influx of copyright cases linked to file sharing websites which host illegally obtained media content.
    [Show full text]
  • Top 10 Most Popular Torrent Sites of 2012
    Ernesto, January 7, 2012 Top 10 Most Popular Torrent Sites of 2012 Continuing a long-standing New Year’s tradition, we present an up-to-date list of the world’s most visited BitTorrent sites. At the start of 2012 The Pirate Bay continues to pull in the most visitors, followed by Torrentz and KickassTorrents. The six-year-old TV-torrent distribution group EZTV appears in the list for the first time, ranked 8th. Which torrent sites get the most visitors at the start of 2012? At first glance little seems to have changed, as many of the sites in the top 10 have been among the top torrent sites for more than half a decade. But moving down the list we see quite a few movers and shakers as well as three newcomers. The most notable absentee this year is TorrentReactor, one of the oldest torrent sites on the Internet. The Russian-based site hasbeen featured in the top 10 since 2006, but missed the cut in 2012. Last year’s best newcomer LimeTorrents took an even bigger hit in traffic and has dropped off the list as well. Below we have compiled a list of the 10 most-visited torrent sites at the start of the new year. Only public and English language sites are included. The list is based on traffic rank reports from Compete and Alexa. In addition, we include last year’s ranking for each of the 10 sites. 1. The Pirate Bay The Pirate Bay is probably the best known BitTorrent brand on the Internet.
    [Show full text]
  • Bittorrent (Protocol) 1 Bittorrent (Protocol)
    BitTorrent (protocol) 1 BitTorrent (protocol) BitTorrent is a peer-to-peer file sharing protocol used for distributing large amounts of data over the Internet. BitTorrent is one of the most common protocols for transferring large files and it has been estimated that peer-to-peer networks collectively have accounted for roughly 43% to 70% of all Internet traffic (depending on geographical location) as of February 2009.[1] Programmer Bram Cohen designed the protocol in April 2001 and released a first implementation on July 2, 2001.[2] It is now maintained by Cohen's company BitTorrent, Inc. There are numerous BitTorrent clients available for a variety of computing platforms. As of January 2012 BitTorrent has 150 million active users according to BitTorrent Inc.. Based on this the total number of monthly BitTorrent users can be estimated at more than a quarter billion.[3] At any given instant of time BitTorrent has, on average, more active users than YouTube and Facebook combined. (This refers to the number of active users at any instant and not to the total number of unique users.)[4][5] Description The BitTorrent protocol can be used to reduce the server and network impact of distributing large files. Rather than downloading a file from a single source server, the BitTorrent protocol allows users to join a "swarm" of hosts to download and upload from each other simultaneously. The protocol is an alternative to the older single source, multiple mirror sources technique for distributing data, and can work over networks with lower bandwidth so many small computers, like mobile phones, are able to efficiently distribute files to many recipients.
    [Show full text]
  • Crawling Bittorrent Dhts for Fun and Profit
    Crawling BitTorrent DHTs for Fun and Profit Scott Wolchok and J. Alex Halderman The University of Michigan {swolchok, jhalderm}@eecs.umich.edu Abstract major torrent discovery sites and the major trackers [1,29] is feasible. Though a boon to copyright enforcement, this This paper presents two kinds of attacks based on crawl- capability reduces the privacy of BitTorrent downloaders ing the DHTs used for distributed BitTorrent tracking. by making it much harder to “hide in the crowd.” First, we show how pirates can use crawling to rebuild The BitTorrent community has responded to these BitTorrent search engines just a few hours after they are trends by deploying decentralizing tracking systems based shut down (crawling for fun). Second, we show how on distributed hash tables (DHTs). So far, their impact content owners can use related techniques to monitor pi- on privacy and copyright enforcement has been unclear. rates’ behavior in preparation for legal attacks and negate Distributed tracking is harder to disrupt through legal any perceived anonymity of the decentralized BitTorrent threats, but users still rely on centralized torrent discov- architecture (crawling for profit). ery sites that remain relatively easy targets. Some might We validate these attacks and measure their perfor- expect that decentralizing the tracking architecture would mance with a crawler we developed for the Vuze DHT. enhance privacy by making monitoring more difficult, but We find that we can establish a search engine with over the question has received little research attention to date. one million torrents in under two hours using a single In this work, we demonstrate how deployed distributed desktop PC.
    [Show full text]
  • Final Thesis
    J Ö N K Ö P I N G I NTERNATIONAL B U S I N E S S S CHOOL JÖNKÖPING UNIVERSITY Convert your enemy into a friend -Innovation strategies for collaboration between record companies and BitTorrent networks Master thesis within Business Administration Authors: Axel Andersen Emil Hristov Tutor: Desalegn Abraha Date: Jönköping, 2009 1 Acknowledgements This thesis is the final project the authors conduct at Jönköping International Business School as Master students. A special acknowledgement is given to our tutor Desalegn Abraha who has contributed with much guidance during the course of the thesis. This research could not have been conducted without the help from our interview respondents from the record companies, and BitTorrent networks. Thus a special thanks is directed towards the people that contributed with their time to help our research. Finally, the authors would like to thank the people who have read, and given comments on the thesis during the semester. Axel Andersen & Emil Hristov Jönköping International Business School, Sweden, June 2009 2 Master Thesis in Business Administration Title: Convert your enemy into a friend – Innovation strategies for collaboration between record companies and BitTorrent networks Authors: Axel Andersen, Emil Hristov Tutor: Desalegn Abraha Date: June 2009 Subject terms: BitTorrent networks, Record companies, Collaboration, File sharing, Changes in music industry, Community of creation, Crowdsourcing, Open innovations Abstract Problem: Record companies are facing a downturn in sales of music. This is seen as consequence of the growth of distribution of music through Internet by file sharing networks such as BitTorrent networks. On one side there are record companies who feel threatened of the illegal file sharing, and on the other side file sharing BitTorrent networks has increased dramatically in number of users since they first approached.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Computer Networks Stanford Univ CS144 Fall 2012
    An Introduction to Computer Networks Stanford Univ CS144 Fall 2012 PDF generated using the open source mwlib toolkit. See http://code.pediapress.com/ for more information. PDF generated at: Tue, 09 Oct 2012 17:42:20 UTC Contents Articles --WEEK ONE-- 1 Introduction 2 Internet 2 What the Internet is 20 Internet protocol suite 20 OSI model 31 Internet Protocol 39 Transmission Control Protocol 42 User Datagram Protocol 59 Internet Control Message Protocol 65 Hypertext Transfer Protocol 68 Skype protocol 75 BitTorrent 81 Architectural Principles 95 Encapsulation (networking) 95 Packet switching 96 Hostname 100 End-to-end principle 102 Finite-state machine 107 --END WEEK ONE-- 118 References Article Sources and Contributors 119 Image Sources, Licenses and Contributors 124 Article Licenses License 125 1 --WEEK ONE-- 2 Introduction Internet Routing paths through a portion of the Internet as visualized by the Opte Project General Access · Censorship · Democracy Digital divide · Digital rights Freedom · History · Network neutrality Phenomenon · Pioneers · Privacy Sociology · Usage Internet governance Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers (ICANN) Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) Internet Governance Forum (IGF) Internet Society (ISOC) Protocols and infrastructure Domain Name System (DNS) Hypertext Transfer Protocol (HTTP) IP address Internet exchange point Internet Protocol (IP) Internet Protocol Suite (TCP/IP) Internet service provider (ISP) Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) Services Blogs · Microblogs · E-mail Fax · File sharing · File transfer Instant messaging · Gaming Podcast · TV · Search Shopping · Voice over IP (VoIP) Internet 3 World Wide Web Guides Outline Internet portal The Internet is a global system of interconnected computer networks that use the standard Internet protocol suite (often called TCP/IP, although not all applications use TCP) to serve billions of users worldwide.
    [Show full text]
  • Bittorrent - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia 11/12/13 Create Account Log In
    BitTorrent - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia 11/12/13 Create account Log in Article Talk Read Edit View history BitTorrent From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Main page Contents This article is about the file sharing protocol. For other uses, see BitTorrent (disambiguation). Featured content This article may be too technical for most readers to Current events understand. Please help improve this article to make it Random article understandable to non-experts, without removing the technical Donate to Wikipedia details. The talk page may contain suggestions. (May 2011) Wikimedia Shop BitTorrent is a protocol supporting the practice of Part of a series on Interaction peer-to-peer file sharing that is used to distribute large File sharing Help amounts of data over the Internet. BitTorrent is one of About Wikipedia the most common protocols for transferring large files, Community portal and peer-to-peer networks have been estimated to Recent changes collectively account for approximately 43% to 70% of Technologies Contact page all Internet traffic (depending on geographical location) Peer to peer · BitTorrent­ · Tools as of February 2009.[1] In November 2004, BitTorrent ­File hosting services was responsible for 35% of all Internet traffic.[2] As of Development and societal aspects Print/export February 2013, BitTorrent was responsible for 3.35% Timeline · Legal­ aspects Non-public file sharing Languages of all worldwide bandwidth, more than half of the 6% Anonymous P2P Friend-to-friend­ Darknet­ of total bandwidth dedicated to file sharing.[3] · · · Private P2P­ العربية Azərbaycanca Programmer Bram Cohen, a former University at File sharing networks and services [4] Беларуская Buffalo graduate student in Computer Science, Gnutella / Gnutella2 (G2) · FastTrack­ · Български designed the protocol in April 2001 and released the ­eDonkey · Direct­ Connect · Mininova­ · ­isoHunt The­ Pirate Bay ­Bitcoin Bosanski first available version on July 2, 2001,[5] and the final · · [6] By country or region Català version in 2008.
    [Show full text]