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

"Robb Topolski" <robb@funchords.com> Wed, 05 November 2008 22:43 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 148DF3A6774; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 14:43:49 -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 D2DB33A6774 for <p2pi@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 14:43:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.475
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.475 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.501, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, 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 00Q1f9n6XT44 for <p2pi@core3.amsl.com>; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 14:43:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from rv-out-0506.google.com (rv-out-0506.google.com [209.85.198.231]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 537BB3A63D2 for <p2pi@ietf.org>; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 14:43:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: by rv-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id b25so242615rvf.49 for <p2pi@ietf.org>; Wed, 05 Nov 2008 14:42:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.141.137.16 with SMTP id p16mr739593rvn.180.1225924971408; Wed, 05 Nov 2008 14:42:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.141.69.3 with HTTP; Wed, 5 Nov 2008 14:42:51 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <3efc39a60811051442o34057671ga5a976342f33872b@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2008 14:42:51 -0800
From: "Robb Topolski" <robb@funchords.com>
To: "Woundy, Richard" <Richard_Woundy@cable.comcast.com>
In-Reply-To: <74CCBBDF76102846AFA7B29F3A98D3F602896489@PACDCEXCMB06.cable.comcast.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <45AEC6EF95942140888406588E1A660205B9E872@PACDCEXCMB04.cable.comcast.com> <C5370881.14992%rpenno@juniper.net> <74CCBBDF76102846AFA7B29F3A98D3F602896489@PACDCEXCMB06.cable.comcast.com>
Cc: "Livingood, Jason" <Jason_Livingood@cable.comcast.com>, p2pi@ietf.org
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: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0868357491=="
Sender: p2pi-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: p2pi-bounces@ietf.org

I don't get the part where access network download consumption increased as
a result of using P4P (section 4.2).  Can someone explain how that could
happen?

Robb

On Wed, Nov 5, 2008 at 2:29 PM, Woundy, Richard <
Richard_Woundy@cable.comcast.com> wrote:

> Reinaldo,
>
> I can answer the easy questions. We will need some assistance from Pando
> (and Yale) for some of the other ones.
>
> >What was the file size in those experiments?
>
> 21 megabytes. From section 2: "Pando distributed a special 21 MB
> licensed video file as in order to measure the effectiveness of P4P
> iTrackers."
>
> >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...
>
> To clarify, most of the raw data (download speed and Internet
> peering/transit traffic volumes) were collected by Pando Networks from
> their P2P clients, not collected by Comcast across its links. So my
> assumption is that the Pando client used the content size (21 MB), and
> divided by the download time to get the speed.
>
> >Was the file already seeded in Comcast's network? More specifically,
> how
> was file propagation done?
>
> Any seeding happened outside of Comcast's network, and outside of
> Comcast's control. That's really a question for Pando.
>
> >Was PEX, DHT and others enabled in the clients?
>
> Pando would know whether PEX was enabled. It would be safe to assume
> that with respect to this trial, DHT was NOT enabled, since Pando
> supplied the tracker. (The pTracker in the draft is a tracker operated
> by Pando.)
>
> >Was local peer discovery enabled in the clients?
>
> Pando would know.
>
> >BTW, can broadcast/multicast peer discovery work in Cable networks?
>
> Do you mean something like this:
> http://bittorrent.org/beps/bep_0026.html?
>
> If so, peer discovery probably would not work over the typical last mile
> cable network. Maybe I'm wrong, but I see this protocol as intended for
> peer discovery within one's home network / LAN / WiFi network, not over
> a cable network.
>
> >So, were clients allowed to become seeders to the outside of Comcast's
> network?
>
> Yes, they were.
>
> As a related item, look closely at section 4.2. The amount of aggregate
> uploaded data from Comcast clients (per swarm) was about 140,000 MB. The
> amount of aggregate downloaded data from Comcast clients (per swarm) was
> about 60,000 MB or so. So the typical Comcast client uploaded more than
> twice the amount of data that it downloaded.
>
> >How much of the swarm was within Comcast and outside?
>
> Most of the swarm was outside of Comcast. Unfortunately I don't have
> access to the size of the global swarm, but I would guess that Comcast
> clients represented no more than 15% of the swarm, and maybe as little
> as 5%. Those guesses are based on the behavior of the random swarm, e.g.
> Comcast clients uploaded to non-Comcast clients 94% of the time in the
> random swarm.
>
> -- Rich
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: p2pi-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:p2pi-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
> Reinaldo Penno
> Sent: Wednesday, November 05, 2008 11:23 AM
> To: Livingood, Jason; p2pi@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [p2pi] draft-livingood-woundy-p4p-experiences-02 posted
>
> 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
> _______________________________________________
> p2pi mailing list
> p2pi@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi
>



-- 
Robb Topolski (robb@funchords.com)
Hillsboro, Oregon USA
http://www.funchords.com/
_______________________________________________
p2pi mailing list
p2pi@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2pi