[98777] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: Extreme congestion (was Re: inter-domain link recovery)
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Alexander Harrowell)
Fri Aug 17 05:25:56 2007
Date: Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:24:31 +0100
From: "Alexander Harrowell" <a.harrowell@gmail.com>
To: "Adrian Chadd" <adrian@creative.net.au>
Cc: michael.dillon@bt.com, nanog@merit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20070817022006.GP23762@skywalker.creative.net.au>
Errors-To: owner-nanog@merit.edu
------=_Part_62470_4680722.1187342671415
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
On 8/17/07, Adrian Chadd <adrian@creative.net.au> wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2007, michael.dillon@bt.com wrote:
>
> > > I'm pushing an agenda in the open source world to add
> > > some concept of locality, with the purpose of moving traffic off ISP
> > > networks when I can. I think the user will be just as happy or
> > > happier, and folks pushing large optics will certainly be.
This is badly needed in my humble opinion; regarding the wireless LAN case
described, it's true that this behaviour would be technically suboptimal,
but interestingly the real reason for implementing it would be maintained -
economics. After all, the network operator (the owner of the wireless LAN)
isn't consuming any more upstream as a result.
>
> > When you hear stories like the Icelandic ISP who discovered that P2P was
> > 80% of their submarine bandwidth and promptly implemented P2P
> > throttling, I think that the open source P2P will be driven to it by
> > their user demand.
Yes. An important factor in future design will be "network
friendliness/responsibility".
.. or we could start talking about how Australian ISPs are madly throttling
> P2P traffic. Not just because of its impact on international trunks,
> but their POP/wholesale DSL infrastructure method just makes P2P even
> between clients on the same ISP mostly horrible.
Similar to the pre-LLU, BT IPStream ops in the UK. Charging flat rates to
customers and paying per-bit to wholesalers is an obvious economic problem;
possibly even more expensive to localise the p2p traffic, if the price of
wholesale access bits is greater than peering/transit ones!
------=_Part_62470_4680722.1187342671415
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 8/17/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Adrian Chadd</b> <<a href="mailto:adrian@creative.net.au">adrian@creative.net.au</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<br>On Thu, Aug 16, 2007, <a href="mailto:michael.dillon@bt.com">michael.dillon@bt.com</a> wrote:<br><br>> > I'm pushing an agenda in the open source world to add<br>> > some concept of locality, with the purpose of moving traffic off ISP
<br>> > networks when I can. I think the user will be just as happy or<br>> > happier, and folks pushing large optics will certainly be.</blockquote><div><br>This is badly needed in my humble opinion; regarding the wireless LAN case described, it's true that this behaviour would be technically suboptimal, but interestingly the real reason for implementing it would be maintained - economics. After all, the network operator (the owner of the wireless LAN) isn't consuming any more upstream as a result.
<br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">><br>> When you hear stories like the Icelandic ISP who discovered that P2P was
<br>> 80% of their submarine bandwidth and promptly implemented P2P<br>> throttling, I think that the open source P2P will be driven to it by<br>> their user demand.</blockquote><div><br>Yes. An important factor in future design will be "network friendliness/responsibility".
<br></div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">.. or we could start talking about how Australian ISPs are madly throttling<br>
P2P traffic. Not just because of its impact on international trunks,<br>but their POP/wholesale DSL infrastructure method just makes P2P even<br>between clients on the same ISP mostly horrible.</blockquote><div><br>Similar to the pre-LLU, BT IPStream ops in the UK. Charging flat rates to customers and paying per-bit to wholesalers is an obvious economic problem; possibly even more expensive to localise the p2p traffic, if the price of wholesale access bits is greater than peering/transit ones!
<br></div><br></div><br>
------=_Part_62470_4680722.1187342671415--
