The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A survey of peer-to-peer content distribution technologies
Abstract
Distributed computer architectures labeled "peer-to-peer" are designed for the sharing of computer resources (content, storage, CPU cycles) by direct exchange, rather than requiring the intermediation or support of a centralized server or authority. Peer-to-peer architectures are characterized by their ability to adapt to failures and accommodate transient populations of nodes while maintaining acceptable connectivity and performance.Content distribution is an important peer-to-peer application on the Internet that has received considerable research attention. Content distribution applications typically allow personal computers to function in a coordinated manner as a distributed storage medium by contributing, searching, and obtaining digital content.In this survey, we propose a framework for analyzing peer-to-peer content distribution technologies. Our approach focuses on nonfunctional characteristics such as security, scalability, performance, fairness, and resource management potential, and examines the way in which these characteristics are reflected in---and affected by---the architectural design decisions adopted by current peer-to-peer systems.We study current peer-to-peer systems and infrastructure technologies in terms of their distributed object location and routing mechanisms, their approach to content replication, caching and migration, their support for encryption, access control, authentication and identity, anonymity, deniability, accountability and reputation, and their use of resource trading and management schemes.
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
Shamir, A. (1979) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/359168.359176 · Cited by 13,756
The Byzantine generals problem
Lamport, L., Shostak, R., & Pease, M. (1982) · ACM Transactions on Programming Languages and Systems · doi:10.1145/357172.357176 · Cited by 6,023
Douceur, J. R. (2002) · Lecture Notes in Computer Science · doi:10.1007/3-540-45748-8_24 · Cited by 4,419
P2p and the promise of internet equality
Agre, P. E. (2003) · Communications of the ACM · doi:10.1145/606272.606298 · Cited by 70
Cited by
The Akamai network: a platform for high-performance internet applications
Nygren, E., Sitaraman, R. K., & Sun, J. (2010) · ACM SIGOPS Operating Systems Review · doi:10.1145/1842733.1842736 · Cited by 726
Distributed and cloud computing: from parallel processing to the Internet of things
(2012) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.49-5712 · Cited by 314
A survey on content-centric technologies for the current Internet: CDN and P2P solutions
Passarella, A. (2012) · Computer Communications · doi:10.1016/j.comcom.2011.10.005 · Cited by 226
Edge-Oriented Computing Paradigms: A Survey on Architecture Design and System Management
Li, C., Xue, Y., Wang, J., Zhang, W., & Li, T. (2019) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3154815 · Cited by 180
Steel, C. M. S., Newman, E., O’Rourke, S., & Quayle, E. (2020) · Forensic Science International: Digital Investigation · doi:10.1016/j.fsidi.2020.300971 · Cited by 33
Metadata
- Authors
- Androutsellis-Theotokis, S., & Spinellis, D.
- Venue
- ACM Computing Surveys
- Published
- 2004-12
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 335-371
- ISSN
- 0360-0300 (ISSN-L)
- 1557-7341
- OpenAlex
- W2160279333
- Cited by
- 1,425
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 117.43
- Type
- journal article
- 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: A survey of peer-to-peer content distribution technologies. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1145/1041680.1041681
- The paper
- Androutsellis-Theotokis, S., & Spinellis, D. (2004). A survey of peer-to-peer content distribution technologies. ACM Computing Surveys. https://doi.org/10.1145/1041680.1041681
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.