[130087] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Online games stealing your bandwidth
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Richard Barnes)
Mon Sep 27 21:41:42 2010
In-Reply-To: <E014299C-38B2-4A72-8BC0-68F913EF0CAB@gci.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2010 21:41:23 -0400
From: Richard Barnes <richard.barnes@gmail.com>
To: Warren Bailey <wbailey@gci.com>
Cc: NANOG <nanog@merit.edu>
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
I thought the issue was more about ISPs encouraging *responsible* P2P.
On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 8:35 PM, Warren Bailey <wbailey@gci.com> wrote:
> Can someone name an ISP that encourages P2P traffic?? ;)
>
> Sent from a mobile phone with a small keyboard, please excuse my mistakes=
.
>
> On Sep 27, 2010, at 4:32 PM, "Richard Barnes" <richard.barnes@gmail.com> =
wrote:
>
>> There's some standardization work being done in the IETF ALTO working
>> group. =A0They're looking at ways ISPs can inform P2P clints about which=
peers
>> are "better", I.e., topologically nearby.
>> http://tools.ietf.org/wg/alto/
>>
>> I'm less familiar with DECADE, but I believe they're working on more
>> directly cache-related stuff.
>> http://tools.ietf.org/wg/decade/
>>
>> On Sep 25, 2010 4:44 PM, "Matthew Walster" <matthew@walster.org> wrote:
>>
>> On 25 September 2010 21:16, Rodrick Brown <rodrick.brown@gmail.com> wrot=
e:
>>> I think most people are...
>> <snip>
>>
>> I once read an article talking about making BitTorrent scalable by
>> using anycasted caching services at the ISP's closest POP to the end
>> user. Given sufficient traffic on a specified torrent, the caching
>> device would build up the file, then distribute that direct to the
>> subscriber in the form of an additional (preferred) peer. Similar to a
>> CDN or Usenet, but where it was cached rather than deliberately pushed
>> out from a locus.
>>
>> Was anything ever standardised in that field? I imagine with much of
>> P2P traffic being (how shall I put this...) less than legal, it's of
>> questionable legality and the ISPs would not want to be held liable
>> for the content cached there?
>>
>> M
>
