Improving the Download Time of BitTorrent-Like Systems

The content distribution techniques have recently started embracing peer-to-peer system as an alternative to the client-server architecture, such as BitTorrent system. BitTorrent system offers a scale mechanism for distributing a large volume of data to a set of peers over the Internet, but it is not designed for minimizing the time taken for all peers to receive the file. As a result, the peers of BitTorrent system may suffer a long download time, specifically the narrow-band peers. In this paper, in order to reduce the download time of BitTorrent, we propose a weighty piece selection strategy instead of the local rarest first strategy in BitTorrent. The proposed strategy is based on the greedy concept that a peer assigns each missing piece a weight according to total number of neighbor's downloaded pieces. The peer selects the missing piece with the highest priority for next download. This strategy can speed up the cooperation between heterogeneous peers while making the BitTorrent more efficient in terms of the average download time and the total elapsed time. The simulation results show that weighty piece selection strategy can improve more than 15% average download time and reduce in average 60% total elapsed time than the BitTorrent system.

[1]  Michalis Faloutsos,et al.  Transport layer identification of P2P traffic , 2004, IMC '04.

[2]  Bobby Bhattacharjee,et al.  Scalable application layer multicast , 2002, SIGCOMM '02.

[3]  Kam-Wing Ng,et al.  Modeling, Analysis and Improvement for BitTorrent-Like File Sharing Networks , 2006, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2006. 25TH IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications.

[4]  Hui Zhang,et al.  A case for end system multicast (keynote address) , 2000, SIGMETRICS '00.

[5]  Gustavo de Veciana,et al.  Service capacity of peer to peer networks , 2004, IEEE INFOCOM 2004.

[6]  Gustavo de Veciana,et al.  Performance of peer-to-peer networks: Service capacity and role of resource sharing policies , 2006, Perform. Evaluation.

[7]  Mikel Izal,et al.  Dissecting BitTorrent: Five Months in a Torrent's Lifetime , 2004, PAM.

[8]  Venkata N. Padmanabhan,et al.  Analyzing and Improving a BitTorrent Networks Performance Mechanisms , 2006, Proceedings IEEE INFOCOM 2006. 25TH IEEE International Conference on Computer Communications.

[9]  Krishna P. Gummadi,et al.  A measurement study of Napster and Gnutella as examples of peer-to-peer file sharing systems , 2002, CCRV.

[10]  Srinivasan Seshan,et al.  A case for end system multicast , 2002, IEEE J. Sel. Areas Commun..

[11]  Gang Wu,et al.  How efficient is BitTorrent? , 2006, Electronic Imaging.

[12]  Rob Sherwood,et al.  Slurpie: a cooperative bulk data transfer protocol , 2004, IEEE INFOCOM 2004.

[13]  B. Cohen,et al.  Incentives Build Robustness in Bit-Torrent , 2003 .

[14]  William Chan,et al.  Improving Traffic Locality in BitTorrent via Biased Neighbor Selection , 2006, 26th IEEE International Conference on Distributed Computing Systems (ICDCS'06).

[15]  Christos Gkantsidis,et al.  Network coding for large scale content distribution , 2005, Proceedings IEEE 24th Annual Joint Conference of the IEEE Computer and Communications Societies..

[16]  Rayadurgam Srikant,et al.  Modeling and performance analysis of BitTorrent-like peer-to-peer networks , 2004, SIGCOMM 2004.

[17]  Venkata N. Padmanabhan,et al.  Analyzing and Improving BitTorrent Performance , 2005 .