[Nanog] P2P traffic optimization Was: Lies, Damned Lies, and Statistics [Was: Re: ATT VP: Internet to hit capacity by 2010]

[Laird Popkin <laird () pando com>]

On Apr 23, 2008, at 2:17 PM, Christopher Morrow wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 11:39 AM, Alexander Harrowell
> <a.harrowell () gmail com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 3:47 PM, Christopher Morrow
> > <christopher.morrow () gmail com> wrote:
> > > It strikes me that often just doing a reverse lookup on the peer
> > > address would be 'good enough' to keep things more 'local' in a
> > > network sense. Something like:
> > >
> > > 1) prefer peers with PTR's like mine (perhaps get address from a
> > > public-ish server - myipaddress.com/ipchicken.com/dshield.org)
> > > 2) prefer peers within my /24->/16 ?
> > >
> > > This does depend on what you define as 'local' as well, 'stay off my
> > > transit links' or 'stay off my last-mile' or 'stay off that godawful
> > > expensive VZ link from CHI to NYC in my backhaul network...
> >
> > Well. here's your problem; depending on the architecture, the IP  
> > addressing
> > structure doesn't necessarily map to the network's cost structure.  
> > This is
> > why I prefer the P4P/DillTorrent announcement model.
>
> sure 80/20 rule... less complexity in the clients and some benefit(s).
> perhaps short term something like the above with longer term more
> realtime info about locality.

For the applications, it's a lot less work to use a clean network map  
from ISP's than it is to in effect derive one from lookups to ASN, / 
24, /16, pings, traceroutes, etc. The main reason to spend the effort  
to implement those tactics is that it's better than not doing  
anything. :-)

Laird Popkin
CTO, Pando Networks
520 Broadway, 10th floor
New York, NY 10012

laird () pando com
c) 646/465-0570


_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list
NANOG () nanog org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog