The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Transport layer identification of P2P traffic
Abstract
Since the emergence of peer-to-peer (P2P) networking in the late '90s, P2P applications have multiplied, evolved and established themselves as the leading `growth app' of Internet traffic workload. In contrast to first-generation P2P networks which used well-defined port numbers, current P2P applications have the ability to disguise their existence through the use of arbitrary ports. As a result, reliable estimates of P2P traffic require examination of packet payload, a methodological landmine from legal, privacy, technical, logistic, and fiscal perspectives. Indeed, access to user payload is often rendered impossible by one of these factors, inhibiting trustworthy estimation of P2P traffic growth and dynamics. In this paper, we develop a systematic methodology to identify P2P flows at the transport layer, i.e., based on connection patterns of P2P networks, and without relying on packet payload. We believe our approach is the first method for characterizing P2P traffic using only knowledge of network dynamics rather than any user payload. To evaluate our methodology, we also develop a payload technique for P2P traffic identification, by reverse engineering and analyzing the nine most popular P2P protocols, and demonstrate its efficacy with the discovery of P2P protocols in our traces that were previously unknown to us. Finally, our results indicate that P2P traffic continues to grow unabatedly, contrary to reports in the popular media.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Karagiannis, T., Broido, A., Brownlee, N., Claffy, K. C., & Faloutsos, M. (2005) · IEEE Global Telecommunications Conference, 2004. GLOBECOM '04. · doi:10.1109/glocom.2004.1378239 · Cited by 504
Self-citation
Cited by
Internet traffic classification using bayesian analysis techniques
Moore, A. W., & Zuev, D. (2005) · Proceedings of the 2005 ACM SIGMETRICS international conference on Measurement and modeling of computer systems · doi:10.1145/1064212.1064220 · Cited by 1,208
Issues and future directions in traffic classification
Dainotti, A., Pescape, A., & Claffy, K. (2012) · IEEE Network · doi:10.1109/mnet.2012.6135854 · Cited by 630
Self-citationBayesian Neural Networks for Internet Traffic Classification
Auld, T., Moore, A. W., & Gull, S. F. (2007) · IEEE Transactions on Neural Networks · doi:10.1109/tnn.2006.883010 · Cited by 494
Internet traffic classification demystified: myths, caveats, and the best practices
Kim, H., Claffy, K., Fomenkov, M., Barman, D., Faloutsos, M., & Lee, K. (2008) · Proceedings of the 2008 ACM CoNEXT Conference on - CONEXT '08 · doi:10.1145/1544012.1544023 · Cited by 485
Self-citationInternet traffic classification using bayesian analysis techniques
Moore, A. W., & Zuev, D. (2005) · ACM SIGMETRICS Performance Evaluation Review · doi:10.1145/1071690.1064220 · Cited by 460
Metadata
- Authors
- Karagiannis, T., Broido, A., Faloutsos, M., & claffy, K.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the 4th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement
- Publisher
- ACM
- Published
- 2004-10-25
- Pages
- 121-134
- OpenAlex
- W2144098589
- Cited by
- 708
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 25.81
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Transport layer identification of P2P traffic. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/1028788.1028804
- The paper
- Karagiannis, T., Broido, A., Faloutsos, M., & claffy, K. (2004). Transport layer identification of P2P traffic. Proceedings of the 4th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement. https://doi.org/10.1145/1028788.1028804
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.