Re: [p2pi] Real life torrent statistics
"Stas Khirman" <stas@khirman.com> Wed, 20 August 2008 00:21 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 6FAEC28C225; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:21:57 -0700 (PDT)
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 281FE3A6A1F for <p2pi@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:21:56 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.598
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001]
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 enOJvki-PtQE for <p2pi@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:21:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.195]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 363E628C22D for <p2pi@ietf.org>; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:21:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from viceroy (ppp-71-139-12-121.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [71.139.12.121]) by mrelay.perfora.net (node=mrus1) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MKpCa-1KVbSN24i4-0005Iv; Tue, 19 Aug 2008 20:21:52 -0400
From: Stas Khirman <stas@khirman.com>
To: 'Laird Popkin' <laird@pando.com>, 'The 8472' <the8472@infinite-source.de>
References: <1104054922.179501219190149690.JavaMail.root@dkny.pando.com> <685421868.179521219190699129.JavaMail.root@dkny.pando.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Aug 2008 17:21:46 -0700
Message-ID: <003401c9025a$be8e0360$140aa8c0@viceroy>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198
thread-index: AckCWHM0lYJ1JL9/SB66Cc+pIwVCugAAPKHw
In-Reply-To: <685421868.179521219190699129.JavaMail.root@dkny.pando.com>
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18keYeJnKRC5o3ymDDrOAXukA+n4MBl10009hD fWcgADXIHiW9Tckonrlfp+vQwYWjOsTLE14fNRjGrodd/fycA4 qDM05f4TU+fWwfLhl3NpA==
Cc: p2pi@ietf.org, p4pwg@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [p2pi] Real life torrent statistics
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: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1411456707=="
Sender: p2pi-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: p2pi-bounces@ietf.org
Quite frankly, I do not thing that collected statistics can support this or another point of view - it is too small set. I'll be glad to share more datapoints with this community - probably in few days. But just for reference from my past data collection - for popular http://tracker.prq.to/ tracker median size of the torrent swarm is 38 peers only. In general, I saw that 10% of TV-shows torrents are using 80% of peers. For movie content - it is about classical 20/80 ratio. _____ From: Laird Popkin [mailto:laird@pando.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 5:05 PM To: The 8472 Cc: p2pi@ietf.org; p4pwg@yahoogroups.com; Stas Khirman Subject: Re: [p2pi] Real life torrent statistics You're right that swarms with 10 peers can't be optimized - the p2p network will connect all 10 peers to each other and move as much data as possible. That being said, I suspect that a small number of very popular swarms that can be optimized would give significant impact on overall data flow, because one swarm with 20,000 peers balances out a lot of 'long tail'. Haiyong Xie of Yale mentioned to me that there was an analysis of this last year, by spidering one of the popular torrent web sites, and their conclusion was that well over 50% of the downloaders were in swarms with 100+ active peers, which is where they estimate that P4P optimization applies. Similarly, when I was in the music business and tracked such things, 2% of the files in the p2p networks accounted for the large majority of the download activity. I think that it would be a very interesting analysis, spidering some torrent web sites and seeing how the distribution of bandwidth is balanced between the 'head' and the 'long tail'. - Laird Popkin, CTO, Pando Networks mobile: 646/465-0570 ----- Original Message ----- From: "The 8472" <the8472@infinite-source.de> To: "Stas Khirman" <stas@khirman.com> Cc: p2pi@ietf.org, p4pwg@yahoogroups.com Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 4:40:39 PM (GMT-0800) America/Los_Angeles Subject: Re: [p2pi] Real life torrent statistics Stas Khirman wrote: To estimate a feasibility of ALTO/P4P for real life torrents , I collected <ip,port> information for peers from one of the most popular "PirateBay" torrents ( almost 20k peers) and maped their IPs to corresponded ASs. Please find attached my working notes with some interesting statistics. Ahh, there is a problem with this one. With torrents you have a significant long tail when it comes to swarm sizes and content. I'm not certain about distribution, but the long tail will probably outweight the... let's say top 100 torrents. Torrents with only 10-20 peers spread throughout several ASNs is a much harder to optimize than the top 100. This problem is aggreviated by swarm fragmentation due to private trackers and since bittorrent does not aim to coalesce all torrents with the same content, i.e. due to different piece sizes, file names etc. Also, I find it surprising geo distribution of the peers - majority were in UK , not in US (probably because content is available in US theaters). Places 3-5 taken by Sweden, Poland and Canada (in total - more peers then in US). This will probably be different if you sample torrents from regional trackers or torrents aimed at other audiences. During some DHT tracing on the weekend i saw a significant proportion of DHT traffic coming from asian countries, though i suspect an inefficient implementation of the DHT by a client that's popular in china to play some role in this distribution. Certainly, observed "heavy" neighboring of peers is a function of swarm size. I intend to investigate a few medium/small size swarms to have a multi-point picture for any future discussions. as i mentioned above we should try to get the big picture, i.e. how relevant the long tail is, measured in aggregate bandwidth. If the small torrents actually make up the bulk of the traffic then any solution will require a high degree of cooperation between ISPs, e.g. caches that cooperate with each other. -- The 8472 independent developer for the Azureus Vuze Bittorrent client _______________________________________________ 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] Real life torrent statistics Stas Khirman
- Re: [p2pi] Real life torrent statistics Hao Chen
- Re: [p2pi] Real life torrent statistics Stas Khirman
- Re: [p2pi] Real life torrent statistics Victor Semanic
- Re: [p2pi] Real life torrent statistics Song Haibin
- Re: [p2pi] Real life torrent statistics Reinaldo Penno
- Re: [p2pi] Real life torrent statistics Marshall Eubanks
- Re: [p2pi] Real life torrent statistics Stas Khirman
- Re: [p2pi] Real life torrent statistics Stas Khirman
- Re: [p2pi] Real life torrent statistics Marshall Eubanks
- Re: [p2pi] Real life torrent statistics Salman Abdul Baset
- Re: [p2pi] Real life torrent statistics The 8472
- Re: [p2pi] Real life torrent statistics Laird Popkin
- Re: [p2pi] Real life torrent statistics Stas Khirman