nanog mailing list archives
Re: Regional differences in P2P
From: Petri Helenius <pete () he iki fi>
Date: Sat, 17 Jul 2004 00:00:04 +0300
Michel Py wrote:
If the cap is based on financial requirements, it usually makes sense to set the cap around 90 to 95 percentile mark of your user base. This makes it fairly network dependent. Even on residential-heavy networks the p2p user population is a smallish fraction subscriber-wise but a fairly significant one bandwidth-wise. (to have some numbers I would say >60% and <10%)Thoughts, anyone?
Pete
Current thread:
- RE: Regional differences in P2P, (continued)
- RE: Regional differences in P2P Mikael Abrahamsson (Jul 15)
- RE: Regional differences in P2P sthaug (Jul 16)
- RE: Regional differences in P2P Mikael Abrahamsson (Jul 16)
- RE: Regional differences in P2P sthaug (Jul 16)
- Transfer Capping by ISPs (Was: Regional differences in P2P) Evaldo Gardenali (Jul 16)
- Re: Transfer Capping by ISPs (Was: Regional differences in P2P) Suresh Ramasubramanian (Jul 16)
- RE: Regional differences in P2P Mikael Abrahamsson (Jul 15)
- Re: Regional differences in P2P Jared Mauch (Jul 16)
- RE: Regional differences in P2P Mikael Abrahamsson (Jul 16)
- Re: Regional differences in P2P Petri Helenius (Jul 16)
- Re: Regional differences in P2P Suresh Ramasubramanian (Jul 16)
- Re: Regional differences in P2P Petri Helenius (Jul 17)
- Re: Regional differences in P2P Alexei Roudnev (Jul 17)
- Re: Regional differences in P2P Jared Mauch (Jul 16)
- Re: Regional differences in P2P Petri Helenius (Jul 17)
- Re: Regional differences in P2P Hank Nussbacher (Jul 17)
- Re: Regional differences in P2P Walter De Smedt (Jul 18)
- Re: Regional differences in P2P Stephen J. Wilcox (Jul 18)