1 / 15

P4P: ISPs and P2P

P4P: ISPs and P2P. Laird Popkin, Pando Networks Doug Pasko, Verizon. The Fundamental Problem?. Traditional ISP feedback/controls to application traffic: Routing Rate control through congestion feedback (packet drops) These are ineffective for P2P

farren
Download Presentation

P4P: ISPs and P2P

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. P4P: ISPs and P2P • Laird Popkin, Pando Networks • Doug Pasko, Verizon

  2. The Fundamental Problem? • Traditional ISP feedback/controls to application traffic: • Routing • Rate control through congestion feedback (packet drops) • These are ineffective for P2P • Due to highly dynamic, scattered traffic pattern caused by dynamic, unguided (network-oblivious) peer selection • Need a mechanism for ISPs to communicate with P2P about network structure and policies

  3. P4P: Partnership among ISPs and P2P Networks P4P

  4. P4P Working Group Members P4P Working Group: Co-Chaired by Pando and Verizon, based on research from Yale, hosted by Distributed Computing Industry Association. Core Group Observers • AT&T • BitTorrent • Cisco Systems • Grid Networks • Joost • LimeWire • Manatt • Abacast • Cablevision • CacheLogic • Cox Communications • Comcast • MPAA • NBC Universal • Oversi • PeerApp • Time Warner Cable • Turner Broadcasting • Pando Networks • RawFlow • Telefonica Group • VeriSign • Verizon • Washington University • Yale University

  5. Goals • Design a framework to enable better ISP and P2P coordination • Guided P2P connections should yield benefits: • Improve throughput to P2P users • Allow ISPs to manage link utilization • Reduces number of links transited by content • Push traffic from undesirable (expensive/limited capacity) links to more desirable (inexpensive/available capacity) links

  6. ISP Benefits • Industry Solution • Create cooperative win-win solutions to an industry issue • Solve the problem before we have to cope with the problem • Carrier Grade P2P • Opportunity for new services • What if the fastest path from A to B is P2P?

  7. P2P Benefits • P2P Applications benefit from: • Faster downloads for users. • Decrease incentives for ISPs to manage P2P traffic. • Easy to implement • Open standard, so one solution for all ISPs. • Easy to implement

  8. P4P Enables Efficient Delivery Traditional CDN P2P P2P with P4P Internet Transit Regional Routers Edge Network More Viewers = Better performance Lower cost More Viewers = Worse performance Higher cost Network Aware P2P will reduce costs, improve performance

  9. P4P Framework – Goals • Performance improvement for both ISPs and P2Ps • Scalability • Support a large number of P2P users and networks in dynamic settings • Privacy preservation • Flexibility: apply to many P2P architectures • Application-specific requirements • Tracker-based and trackerless P2P systems • “Gossip” among peers • Ease of implementation (“low hanging fruit”) • Open standard: any ISP, P2P can easily implement it

  10. pTracker iTracker 2 3 4 1 peer ISP A P4P: Architecture • Use BitTorrent in a single ISP as an example • pTracker runs P2P system • iTracker makes suggestions for peering relationships • Information flow: • peer queries pTracker • pTracker asks iTracker for guidance (occasionally) • iTracker returns high-level peering suggestions • pTracker selects and returns a set of active peers, according to the suggestions • iTracker can be run by trusted third parties, P2P network, or ISPs.

  11. Optimizing P2P Peering • Formulate as a joint optimization problem • ISPs’ objective: minimize network utilization by P2P • P2Ps’ objective: maximize throughput • Joint Objective: Protect and Improve customer experience

  12. Evaluation – Simulations • Simulation Methodology • Discrete-event simulation • a module for modeling BitTorrent protocol • a module for modeling underlying network topology and data transfer dynamics using TCP rate equation • Network topology provided by AT&T, Telefonica, and Verizon.

  13. Results: Good for ISPs • P4P yields a dramatic drop in data delivery average “hop count”, which equates to lower cost to ISPs. Telefonica Simulation Verizon Simulation

  14. Results: Good for P2Ps • P4P yields a dramatic improvement in data delivery speed, which results in faster downloads for users. Telefonica Simulation Verizon Simulation

  15. Interested? • P4PWG is free to join. • Monthly phone calls (and @ CES, Tuesday at 8:00am) • Working Group mission: • Evaluate the P4P design through large-scale experiments • Formalize and promote adoption of P4P protocols • Serve as a forum for ISPs and P2P networks • For more info, e-mail Marty Lafferty: marty@dcia.info • or laird@pando.com • or doug.pasko@verizon.com

More Related