Re: [p2pi] draft-livingood-woundy-p4p-experiences-02 posted

Reinaldo Penno <rpenno@juniper.net> Wed, 05 November 2008 16:27 UTC

Return-Path: <p2pi-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: p2pi-archive@ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-p2pi-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC78C3A6BEC; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 08:27:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: p2pi@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: p2pi@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1CD853A6ADE for <p2pi@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 08:27:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id H2uetdMEhXqM for <p2pi@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 08:27:47 -0800 (PST)
Received: from exprod7og116.obsmtp.com (exprod7ob116.obsmtp.com [64.18.2.218]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 167423A6C10 for <p2pi@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 08:27:43 -0800 (PST)
Received: from source ([66.129.228.6]) by exprod7ob116.postini.com ([64.18.6.12]) with SMTP; Wed, 05 Nov 2008 08:27:45 PST
Received: from pi-smtp.jnpr.net ([10.10.2.36]) by p-emsmtp03.jnpr.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Wed, 5 Nov 2008 08:23:45 -0800
Received: from proton.jnpr.net ([10.10.2.37]) by pi-smtp.jnpr.net with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6713); Wed, 5 Nov 2008 11:23:44 -0500
Received: from 172.23.1.75 ([172.23.1.75]) by proton.jnpr.net ([10.10.2.37]) with Microsoft Exchange Server HTTP-DAV ; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 16:23:44 +0000
User-Agent: Microsoft-Entourage/12.13.0.080930
Date: Wed, 05 Nov 2008 08:23:29 -0800
From: Reinaldo Penno <rpenno@juniper.net>
To: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com>, <p2pi@ietf.org>
Message-ID: <C5370881.14992%rpenno@juniper.net>
Thread-Topic: [p2pi] draft-livingood-woundy-p4p-experiences-02 posted
Thread-Index: Ack986aY/WfQloYCRXeJo2Sm/bVnGwAAgOvAAFtK/O4=
In-Reply-To: <45AEC6EF95942140888406588E1A660205B9E872@PACDCEXCMB04.cable.comcast.com>
Mime-version: 1.0
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 05 Nov 2008 16:23:44.0338 (UTC) FILETIME=[DF5ABB20:01C93F62]
Subject: Re: [p2pi] draft-livingood-woundy-p4p-experiences-02 posted
X-BeenThere: p2pi@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: P2P Infrastructure Discussion <p2pi.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi>, <mailto:p2pi-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/p2pi>
List-Post: <mailto:p2pi@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:p2pi-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi>, <mailto:p2pi-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: p2pi-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: p2pi-bounces@ietf.org

Hello Jason/Rich,

This is such an interesting draft. I'm surprised there are no questions
about it. Maybe everybody else is part of P4P one way or another and I'm not
in the 'in' crowd (;-) so I have questions.

* What was the file size in those experiments? Some post long ago said the
file size in some P4P experiments was really small, as opposed to the top
100 torrents where the file size is ~1Gb. I was curious what is the
optimization payback in terms of download time for large files as opposed
small files. 

* How long would it take to download the file in the three different
scenarios? I know that more consumed bandwidth in access might lead one to
conclude that file was downloaded faster but I'm not sure this is a
straightforward conclusion.

* Was the file already seeded in Comcast's network? More specifically, how
was file propagation done? All clients started from scratch and had to start
pulling the file from some other side of the world and then exchanging
pieces? This is mainly due to the discussion in 4.2.

* Was PEX, DHT and others enabled in the clients?

* Was local peer discovery enabled in the clients? BTW, can
broadcast/multicast peer discovery work in Cable networks?

* If more clients finish downloading faster and become seeders you would
think that for popular content Comcast's upstream bandwidth would increase
due to the number of seeder in its network. So, were clients allowed to
become seeders to the outside of Comcast's network? How much of the swarm
was within Comcast and outside?

Thanks,

Reinaldo

On 11/3/08 12:49 PM, "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com>
wrote:

> For some reason the URL was cut to two lines - trying again:
> 
> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-livingood-woundy-p4p-experienc
> es-02.txt
> 
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: p2pi-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:p2pi-bounces@ietf.org] On
>> Behalf Of Livingood, Jason
>> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2008 3:35 PM
>> To: p2pi@ietf.org
>> Subject: [p2pi] draft-livingood-woundy-p4p-experiences-02 posted
>> 
>> A draft at
>> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-livingood-woundy-p4p
>> -experienc
>> es-02.txt may be of interest to folks that have been
>> interested in P2Pi and ALTO.  We have requested time on the
>> ALTO agenda at IETF 73 to present this.
>> 
>> Regards
>> Jason
>> _______________________________________________
>> p2pi mailing list
>> p2pi@ietf.org
>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> p2pi mailing list
> p2pi@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi

_______________________________________________
p2pi mailing list
p2pi@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi