RE: Regional differences in P2P

Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
Peak almost twice upload as download.
Average is 2.5-3 times more upload than download.
ADSL 8M/800k:
Peak twice the amount download as upload
Average is 1.3-1.5 more download than upload
Upload bw usage is almost flat over time
Download bw peak is approx double the average level.

I have similar figures.

My interpretation of this is that p2p networks are
quite intelligent in using the available bandwidth,

All the available egress bandwidth, indeed. It is very unusual to see a
p2p broadband client maxed out on the downstream. But what is also true
is that the bugger the upstream, the better what comes as p2p
downstream, as most p2p systems have something that rewards heavy

and that Copyright holders only solution is a
"content crunch" due to providers limiting their
users upload potential due to heavy usage, such as
capping the amount of bandwidth allowed per month
or alike.

I agree, but I see it as a bottom line matter, not a Copyright matter.
It does cost a lot of money to build/upgrade the network to support big
bandwidth and the corresponding transit.

Walter De Smedt wrote:
It makes more sense to introduce more differentiation in
product offerings (pricing) where BW 'hoggers' pay more
than the 'moderate' users instead of a general price
increase. The net effect should be that profits increase,
either by reduced network load or by higher revenues from
product differentiation.

Agree in principle.

Caveat: this might be an utopian vision :wink:

Let's say we don't have the tools yet for this. This is why today we
speed limits, because speed limits are the poor man's bandwidth

what if P2P applications would employ encryption
schemes (e.g. IPSec) - this would render
signature-based recognition useless.

p2p apps _will_ use encryption sooner or later, if not to fool
signature-based recognition systems to try to dissimulate the piracy
behind encryption.

Are there any p2P systems which optimize traffic
by localizing it, when possible?

It's not possible today. Optimizing traffic by localizing it would imply
that out of two possible sources, one local and one remote, you use only
the local one. This goes against speed: most p2p clients will download
simultaneously from both sources (from all available sources for that
matter). Optimizing traffic by localizing it requires that the supply
exceeds the demand, which we don't have today.

Besides, there is another form of localizing that happens on campuses,
it's called a blank CD-R :slight_smile: