On 8/17/07, Adrian Chadd <adrian@creative.net.au> wrote:

On Thu, Aug 16, 2007, michael.dillon@bt.com wrote:

> > I'm pushing an agenda in the open source world to add
> > some concept of locality, with the purpose of moving traffic off ISP
> > networks when I can. I think the user will be just as happy or
> > happier, and folks pushing large optics will certainly be.

This is badly needed in my humble opinion;  regarding the wireless LAN case described, it's true that this behaviour would be technically suboptimal, but interestingly the real reason for implementing it would be maintained - economics. After all, the network operator (the owner of the wireless LAN) isn't consuming any more upstream as a result.

>
> When you hear stories like the Icelandic ISP who discovered that P2P was
> 80% of their submarine bandwidth and promptly implemented P2P
> throttling, I think that the open source P2P will be driven to it by
> their user demand.

Yes. An important factor in future design will be "network friendliness/responsibility".

.. or we could start talking about how Australian ISPs are madly throttling
P2P traffic. Not just because of its impact on international trunks,
but their POP/wholesale DSL infrastructure method just makes P2P even
between clients on the same ISP mostly horrible.

Similar to the pre-LLU, BT IPStream ops in the UK. Charging flat rates to customers and paying per-bit to wholesalers is an obvious economic problem; possibly even more expensive to localise the p2p traffic, if the price of wholesale access bits is greater than peering/transit ones!