[100448] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Comcast blocking p2p uploads
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Keith O'Neill)
Tue Oct 23 15:36:15 2007
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 15:01:19 -0400
From: "Keith O'Neill" <keith@pando.com>
To: Joe Greco <jgreco@ns.sol.net>
CC: Leo Bicknell <bicknell@ufp.org>, nanog@nanog.org
In-Reply-To: <471E4402.5020201@pando.com>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
Forgot the links =P
http://www.wired.com/software/webservices/news/2007/08/p2p
http://www.dcia.info/documents/P4P_Overview.pdf
Keith O'Neill wrote:
>
> Actually Pando does try to localize traffic as much as possible. Not
> only that we have started the P4P Working Group.
>
> Keith
>
> Pando Networks
>
> See link below
>
> Joe Greco wrote:
>>> In a message written on Fri, Oct 19, 2007 at 03:21:09PM -0400, Joe
>>> Provo wr=
>>> ote:
>>>
>>>> Content is irrelevent. BT is a protocol-person's dream and an ISP
>>>> nightmare. The bulk of the slim profit margin exists in taking=20
>>>> advantage of stat-mux oversubscription. BT blows that out of the=20
>>>> water.
>>>>
>>> I'm a bit confused by your statement. Are you saying it's more
>>> cost effective for ISP's to carry downloads thousands of miles
>>> across the US before giving them to the end user than it is to allow
>>> a local end user to "upload" them to other local end users?
>>>
>>
>> It's quite possible that I've completely missed it, but I hadn't seen
>> many
>> examples of P2P protocols where any effort was made to locate "local"
>> users and prefer them. In some cases, this may happen due to the
>> type of
>> content, but I'd guess it to be rare. Am I missing some new
>> development?
>>
>> If it isn't being transferred locally, then the ISP is being stuck with
>> the pain of carrying a download thousands of miles, probably from a
>> peering (or worse, transit) with another ISP that has also had to
>> carry it some distance.
>>
>> ... JG
>>
>
