Comparison of Data Transfer Performance of BitTorrent Transmission Protocols

Yıl 2019, Cilt: 40 Sayı: 3, 762 - 767, 30.09.2019

Halil Arslan Özkan Canay

https://doi.org/10.17776/csj.461655

Öz

BitTorrent,
one of the distributed file sharing protocols, is regarded as one of the first
examples of decentralized Internet philosophy and is among the important
research areas in this context. TCP was initially used as the transport layer
protocol in BitTorrent, and the transition to the uTP protocol was made because
of the problems of latency and excessive bandwidth consumption. Later, with
WebTorrent, which is a BitTorrent protocol adapted to the web, WebRTC was
proposed as a transport layer protocol. Thus, BitTorrent protocol is enabled to
work directly through Internet browsers without using any plugin. In this
study, the data exchange sizes in the torrent shares of these three
transmission protocols have been compared and the advantages and disadvantages
of these protocols were demonstrated in this context.

Anahtar Kelimeler

BitTorrent, WebTorrent, TCP, uTP, WebRTC

BitTorrent İletim Protokollerinin Veri Aktarım Başarımlarının Karşılaştırılması

Öz

Dağıtık
dosya paylaşım protokollerinden BitTorrent, merkezi olmayan internet
felsefesinin ilk örneklerinden olarak kabul edilmekte ve bu bağlamda önemli
araştırma alanları arasında yer almaktadır. BitTorrent’te iletim katmanı
protokolü olarak başlangıçta TCP kullanılmış, gecikme ve bant genişliğinin
aşırı tüketilmesi problemlerinden dolayı uTP protokolüne geçiş yapılmıştır.
Daha sonra BitTorrent protokolünün Web’e uyarlanmış hali olan WebTorrent ile
iletim katmanı protokolü olarak WebRTC önerilmiştir. Bu sayede herhangi bir
eklenti kullanmadan doğrudan internet tarayıcıları üzerinden BitTorrent
protokolünün çalışması sağlanmıştır. Yapılan çalışmada, bu üç iletim
protokolünün torrent paylaşımlarındaki veri alışveriş boyutları
karşılaştırılmış ve bu bağlamda avantaj ve dezavantajları ortaya konulmuştur.

Anahtar Kelimeler

BitTorent, WebTorrent, TCP, uTP, WebRTC

Kaynakça

• [1] Gong, Y., Rossi, D., Testa, C., Valenti, S., & Täht, M. D. Fighting the bufferbloat: on the coexistence of AQM and low priority congestion control. Computer Networks, 65 (2014) 255-267.
• [2] Adamsky, F., Khayam, S. A., Jäger, R., & Rajarajan, M. Stealing bandwidth from BitTorrent seeders. Computers & Security, 46 (2014) 126-140.
• [3] Aboukhadijeh, Feross. Streaming torrent client for the web. https://github.com/feross/webtorrent. Retrieved February 1, 2017.
• [4] Norberg, A. uTorrent transport protocol. http://www.bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0029.html. Retrieved January 30, 2017.
• [5] Aboukhadijeh, F. WebTorrent: Using WebRTC and Mad Science to Bring BitTorrent to the Web. Software Delivery Craftsmanship Matters (2014)
• [6] Burgstaller, F., Derler, A., Kern, S., Schanner, G., & Reiter, A. Anonymous communication in the browser via onion-routing. IEEE 10th International Conference on P2P, Parallel, Grid, Cloud and Internet Computing (3PGCIC) (2015) 260-267.
• [7] A Study of WebRTC Security. NTT Communications project. http://webrtc-security.github.io/. Retrieved January 29, 2017.
• [8] Feher, B., Sidi, L., Shabtai, A., & Puzis, R. The Security of WebRTC. arXiv preprint: 1601.00184. (2016) 1-10.
• [9] Cohen, B. Incentives build robustness in BitTorrent. Workshop on Economics of Peer-to-Peer systems, 6 (2003) 68-72.
• [10] Testa, C., & Rossi, D. Delay-based congestion control: Flow vs. BitTorrent swarm perspectives. Computer Networks, 60 (2014) 115-128.
• [11] Adamsky, F. Analysis of bandwidth attacks in a bittorrent swarm (Doctoral dissertation). University of London. (2016)
• [12] Chiu, D. M., & Jain, R. Analysis of the increase and decrease algorithms for congestion avoidance in computer networks. Computer Networks and ISDN systems, 17(1) (1989) 1-14.
• [13] Rossi, D., Testa, C., Valenti, S., & Muscariello, L. LEDBAT: the new BitTorrent congestion control protocol. Proceedings of IEEE 19th International Conference on Computer Communications and Networks (2010) 1-6
• [14] Testa, C., & Rossi, D. On the impact of uTP on BitTorrent completion time. IEEE International Conference on Peer-to-Peer Computing (2011) 314-317.
• [15] Adamsky, F., Khayam, S. A., Jäger, R., & Rajarajan, M. P2P file-sharing in hell: exploiting BitTorrent vulnerabilities to launch distributed reflective DoS attacks. 9th USENIX Workshop on Offensive Technologies (2015)
• [16] Arslan, H., Tuncel, S., & Yuksek, A. G. Comparison of the Web based multimedia protocols for NAT traversal performance. IEEE 23nd Signal Processing and Communications Applications Conference (SIU) (2015) 915-918.
• [17] WebRTC - Real Time Communications in the browser. http://www.webrtc.org. Retrieved February 1, 2017.
• [18] Hickson, I. WebRTC 1.0: Real-time Communication Between Browsers. http://www.w3.org/TR/webrtc/. Retrieved February 1, 2017.
• [19] Aboukhadijeh, F. WebTorrent. JSConf Asia. https://2014.jsconf.asia/. Retrieved February 1, 2017.