Download - P2P: an ISP's Perspective
add image
P2P: An ISP’s Point of View
Pablo Rodriguez Telefonica Research, Barcelona
2
P2P Success…
P2P is everywhere...
P2P Telephony: Skype (or how to deal with NATs)
P2P TV: Joost is about to realize the dream of ubiquitous/personalized TV.
P2P File Delivery: bittorrent.com scales large file dissemination without having to wait for IP Multicast
P2P Data Syncing: backs up your data and keeps it in sync across all your computers, e.g. Groove
3
Why…? We got tired of waiting for the network to support various
things:
— E2E IP Multicast
— Content-Based Naming Protocol
— Anycasting
— End2end reachability
Quickly experiment new ideas:
— no need to change all routers in the world or make an agreement with every single ISP in the world
4
P2P Swarming & Routing Protocols
Packet Networks: Time MultiplexingTime Multiplexing
— Reuse the same channel across time
P2P: Space MultiplexingSpace Multiplexing
— Leverage unused resources across nodes in the network
5
Can we integrate P2P swarming concepts with routing and use network coding to build a universal swarm?
Oviedo, Spain
7
And as we all know . . .
ILLEGAL P2P is the largest bandwidth consumer in the Internet
Eye candy from cachelogic.com, 2005
BitTorrent
eDonkey
non-”P2P”
8
But others think different… Paul Francis, 10th WCW.
Things are changing.And the numbers are showing so….
Down/Up Traffic
9
June-06
Oct-06
Jan-07 March-07
June-07
Oct-07
1.07 1.1 1.13 1.17 1.25 1.37
Why….?
The battle for bandwidth and copyrights
11
Two types of P2P:Illegal DownloadsCommercial
Downloads
12
ILLEGAL P2P and ISPs…
13
P2P and ISPs
In one sense, ISPs of course love it…
— Because a lot more customers subscribe for broadband
— Though they must be kicking themselves for not charging for volume during the P2P growth boom!
14
Ultimately there are some fundamentals here
P2P protocols allow end hosts to pretty much fill their access bandwidth constantly
Total access bandwidth could exceed total backbone bandwidth by (very roughly) one or two orders of magnitude
In other words, the Internet is (or easily could be) over-subscribed.
15
Difficulties
Increased traffic volume without increased revenue
— Users got a lot of value out of P2P but nobody got paid extra for it!
— Eventually, ISPs will reach customer saturation, and then…
Conflicts between Overlay and Underlay
— P2P topologies are not aware of the ISPs economics.
— This makes P2P traffic to be routed over expensive transit links.
16
Overlay vs Underlay Conflicts
Client/Server Economics
17
P2P Economics
18
19
Solutions
Filter P2P Traffic
— Reduces access revenue
Add caches
— Expensive to maintain, legal problems
Keep traffic within ISP
Establish new ISP relationships
— Flattens the Internet
Redirect traffic to less expensive peering points
P2P traffic could go through unwanted links
20
SPRINT/LEVEL3
Access ISP
Telefonica Backbone
Tel Spain
Tel Brasil
Transit ISP
Backbone
Access ISPs
Transit ($$$)
P2P P2P
P2P
Other Backbone
(II)
Peering ($$)
Other Backbone
(I)
Peering ($)
Can ISPs take advantage of clients within?
Perc
en
tag
e o
f To
rren
ts
21
Percentage of local Peers
-Two modes:One for all local swarmsAnother for all foreign swarms
Potential for locality for Telefonica
-More than 50% of traffic could stay within
23
What about LEGAL P2P?
24
Several Content providers are using legal P2P networks to reduce their distribution cost to zero
The most popular case is the BBC.
However, they are basically pushing the distribution cost to the ISP…
Content Providers are moving fast…
BBC iMP – Legal P2P Distribution
• Content Trial Sep 05• Sky announced competing offering• Every major broadcaster evaluating P2P
26
And ISPs are already complaining…
27
Moral:One way or another, legit content providers have to pay for distribution and current legal P2P models do not fit well ISPs
28
and… one way to keep everybody happy is if ISPs deploy their own legal P2P technology
Telco Managed P2P
29
30
Why does it makes sense? ISPs can control the user experience and how
the p2p traffic flows in his network
ISPs can engage in the content distribution cycle
Removes content distribution hassle from Content Providers
Integrates well with existing IPTV solutions
-
31
Massive Data Centers NOW
data centersdata centers
P2PP2P
Capital intensive
Huge energy consumption
Far from the end users
Capital intensive
Huge energy consumption
Far from the end users
Uncoordinated
Only statistical QoS
Poor use of resources
— Random topologies
— Simplistic scheduling
Uncoordinated
Only statistical QoS
Poor use of resources
— Random topologies
— Simplistic scheduling
I am just a
process
I have steel walls
a h
ug
e
gap
32
Distributed Nano data centers using set-top-boxes
power & cooling for free
decent CPU & storage
predictable behavior
central control
power & cooling for free
decent CPU & storage
predictable behavior
central control
A set-top-box provides
… all we need to do is organize them a bit!
One Real Example: Imagenio P2P
homegateway STB
PC
TV
DSLAM
customer premiseTV
head end
ISP
IP MulticastInternet phone
33
Internet (1 Mb/s)
VoIP
IPTV (5 Mb/s)1-2 channels
Last mile(6 Mb/s)
1Gb/s
6Mb/s
Joined work with Cambridge Univ and KAIST
P2P for Past Scenes: VoD Server Savings
34
(no p2p)
(p2p)
Conclusions P2P has provided a great opportunity to deploy new
applications
There is a lot of potential to integrate P2P swarming solutions in routing (and use network coding to avoid scheduling problems)
However, the economics are still not clear and interactions with ISPs are non-optimal. P2P systems will need to adapt.
Telco-Managed P2P systems provide lots of opportunities to scale IP-TV services and a stable P2P ecosystem
35
36