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

["Alexander Harrowell" <a.harrowell () gmail com>]

On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 2:38 PM, Mike Gonnason <gonnason () gmail com> wrote:

> This idea is what I am concerned about. Until the whole copyright mess
> gets sorted out, wouldn't these iTracker supernodes be a goldmine of
> logs for copyright lawyers? They would have a great deal of
> information about what exactly is being transferred, by whom and for
> how long.


A good point about the approach of announcing a list of prefixes and
preference metrics, rather than doing lookups for each peer individually, is
that the supernode's logs will only tell you who used a p2p client at all;
nothing about what they did with it.

If you have to lookup each peer, the log would be enough to start building a
social graph of the p2p network, which would be a good start towards knowing
who to send the nastygram to. Reading the following description of the P4P
group's current approach, this looks like it's what they're doing:

> The approach that P4P takes is to have an intermediate server (which we
call an iTracker) that >processes the network maps and provides abstracted
guidance (lists of IP prefixes and >percentages) to the p2p networks that
allows them to figure out which peers are near each other.
_______________________________________________
NANOG mailing list
NANOG () nanog org
http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog