Probably because of blocking at the origin point, such as corporate net-mgrs trying to prevent bandwidth hogs or liability issues. Rubens ----- Original Message ----- From: "Petri Helenius" <pete@he.iki.fi> To: "Stephen Sprunk" <stephen@sprunk.org>; "Jack Bates" <jbates@brightok.net> Cc: "Richard A Steenbergen" <ras@e-gerbil.net>; "Peter Galbavy" <peter.galbavy@knowtion.net>; "Mike Lyon" <mlyon@fitzharris.com>; "Simon Lyall" <simon.lyall@ihug.co.nz>; "Tony Rall" <trall@almaden.ibm.com>; "North American Noise and Off-topic Gripes" <nanog@merit.edu> Sent: Monday, March 31, 2003 6:08 PM Subject: Re: State Super-DMCA Too True | | > Well, most p2p apps live on well-known ports, and Cisco's QOS mechanism | > allows easy classification on ports. Yes, most of the p2p apps are | > port-agile -- but only if they are completely blocked. My experience is | > that if you let the p2p stuff through, it'll stick to its default port and | > you can police with impunity. | | Our data shows that between 30% and 50% of p2p data flows on "non-standard" | ports if you run an unblocked environment. | | Pete |