Analysis of the evolution of peer-to-peer systems

By David Liben-Nowell, Hari Balakrishnan, David R Karger. ACM SIGACT-SIGOPS Symposium on Principles of Distributed Computing, 2002

498 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Efficient Peer-to-Peer Keyword Searching (2003, background): “They keep churn costs [11] – the costs associated with managing node joins and departures – logarithmic with the size of the network.”
Understanding churn in peer-to-peer networks (2006, background): “Prior simulation and analysis studies have typically assumed both distributions to be exponential [15, 18, 22], though some studies have modeled the session length distribution as Pareto [14,16] (i.”
A survey and comparison of peer-to-peer overlay network schemes (2005, background): “If FIND NODE fails to return a peer that is any closer,”
Survey of research towards robust peer-to-peer networks: Search methods (2006, background): “An earlier paper had posed the question, ‘‘For lookups to be successful during churn, how regularly do the Chord stabilization routines need to run?’’ [291].”
Koorde: A Simple Degree-Optimal Distributed Hash Table (2003, background): “Koorde: A simple degree-optimal distributed hash table M. Frans Kashoek and David R. Karger MIT Laboratory for Computer Science 2004/11/04 IDEON camp memo 1 1.1 de Bruijn graph DHT DHT "!”