Bram Cohen's Cache DreamsPushing caching idea on ISPs to avoid traffic shaping ( old news - 09:25AM Tuesday Aug 08 2006) tags: Fileswapping · bandwidth · contentBram Cohen and the Bit Torrent boys are tired of simple geek adoration, and are eager to profit from their creation. As such, the company has been trying to strike deals with legitimate content developers and the RIAA/MPAA. For this reason, they're obviously not thrilled that ISPs are throttling all Bit Torrent traffic, as the throttles don't care whether Bit Torrent traffic is legit or not. Users are getting around the traffic shaping by changing ports and employing clients that use encryption, something Bram Cohen argued wasn't the "solution" back in January. This isn't Cohen's preferred solution, clearly, because it ruins the company's financial plans. Cohen, eager to get on the right side of ISPs, has been selling the idea of caching Bit Torrent content to ISPs in order to reduce network strain. "We spent an extraordinary amount of time face to face with the largest ISPs in the world who now see anywhere between a third and up to 70% of all their traffic in the BT protocol," recently stated Bit Torrent CEO Ashwin Narvin. "[Were] trying to convince them theres a better way to manage the BitTorrent protocol then to limit it and to shape it."Their caching solution, implemented in the latest Bit Torrent client release, utilizes the "Cache Discovery Protocol developed in cooperation with Cachelogic. The protocol makes it easy for ISPs to detect the most popular torrents, cache the data, and seed the torrent. One obvious problem is that ISPs certainly won't be caching pirated content, which makes up the majority of Bit Torrent traffic. To control this traffic, they'll almost certainly continue to lean on traffic shaping - which leaves Cohen and company in a considerable quandary. Related:- Music Label Urges Pirate Bay Trading
- MPAA: ISPs Should Be Copyright Cops
- Joost Beta Now Available To All
- RIAA: Anti-Virus Software Should Filter Pirated Content
- Despite Piracy, NIN Experiment Still Nets $750,000
- P2P Filters Not Ready For Prime Time
- Comcast Scraps P2P 'Bill Of Rights' Idea
- Send Your Enemy's Printer A DMCA Warning!
|
 peerimpact
join:2005-11-07 Londonderry, VT
| Slyck has a better article on this Slyck P2P News has a good overwiew of what Bittorent and Cachelogic are up to with the VelociX network and be reminded that Cachelogic are working with many p2p companies that are providing "authorised" p2p content.
»www.slyck.com/news.php?story=1259 | |
|  nasadude
join:2001-10-05 Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| cache at risk of being sued? unless an ISP has an agreement that the (legal) content can be cached (sounds like a copy to me), I would imagine they would be at risk of being sued by the content owner/industry.
I would also imagine that before that agreement is made, the owner/industry would demand payment for caching that copy. | |
|  |  patcat88
join:2002-04-05 Jamaica, NY
| Re: cache at risk of being sued? said by nasadude :unless an ISP has an agreement that the (legal) content can be cached (sounds like a copy to me), I would imagine they would be at risk of being sued by the content owner/industry. I would also imagine that before that agreement is made, the owner/industry would demand payment for caching that copy. No, BT caching wouldnt get takedown'ed, »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Online_Cop···ovisions
BT caching is automatic, and based on load or w/e, then the ISP isnt liable, its the users that trigger the caching, and if a ISP doesnt cache, the users will still receive it.
P2P throttling will never work until the internet becomes a walled garden and thats not any time soon. Caching is the only thing ISP can do to not pay for high transit costs. | |
|  |  bohn
join:2006-05-30 Scarborough, ON
| The problem is these leeches. Now traffic shaping or no traffic shaping these maggots that don't share should be tossed off of bittorent forever not just by changing ip addresses. The solution is to blackball these leeches for life so they never get back on the bittorent network ever well as their decendents with the same last name. | |
|  rradina
join:2000-08-08 Chesterfield, MO
·Charter Pipeline
·Vonage
| Utilization According to the story, ISPs are claiming anywhere from 33% to 70% of their traffic is BitTorrent (BT). What's the utilization if BT is completely removed? In other words, is BT starving other traffic or are the ISPs trying to delay bandwidth upgrades by reducing the BT service level? What percent of customers use BT? If BT was eliminated by an ISP, would those customers leave?
I guess I'm of the opinion that ISPs should not be in the business of trying to determine whether or not BT traffic is or is not legitimate. Of course it's not hard to see that I'm in favor of net neutrality. I believe Google, MSN, Yahoo and AOL pay plenty for their pipes and should not be charged premiums because backbone providers must invest to handle ever increasing traffic demands.
Consider it this way --- as a home owner I have to plan to spend a portion of my income on periodic maintenance to ensure that my house does fall into disrepair. Imagine if I neglected it for 10 years -- instead spending the maintenance money on lavish vacations. Suddenly the roof starts leaking and I have no money to repair it. I now try to demand more money from my employer to make the repairs. This only works if I have a monopoly on the services I provide to my employer or I and other employees collude to pressure the employer to meet our demands. | |
|  |   John Galt Spricket24 Premium join:2004-09-30 Oceanside, OR
| Re: Utilization said by rradina :In other words, is BT starving other traffic or are the ISPs trying to delay bandwidth upgrades by reducing the BT service level? What percent of customers use BT? If BT was eliminated by an ISP, would those customers leave? This is EXACTLY the problem...BT and similar programs will "suck down" the whole pipe if they are left unthrottled and unshaped. Even ONE customer can seriously disrupt a network...
The day Bram coded the ability to open 10,000 simultaneous connections (or more), was the day he put the "noose around his neck". -- A is A | |
|  |  |  rradina
join:2000-08-08 Chesterfield, MO
·Charter Pipeline
·Vonage
| Re: Utilization said by John Galt :said by rradina :In other words, is BT starving other traffic or are the ISPs trying to delay bandwidth upgrades by reducing the BT service level? What percent of customers use BT? If BT was eliminated by an ISP, would those customers leave? This is EXACTLY the problem...BT and similar programs will "suck down" the whole pipe if they are left unthrottled and unshaped. Even ONE customer can seriously disrupt a network... The day Bram coded the ability to open 10,000 simultaneous connections (or more), was the day he put the "noose around his neck". How can one customer with a 5/10/15Mbps pipe wipe out an ISP's infrastructure? Granted, 10,000 connections per user could quickly get very stressful if the ISP has equipment in the middle that needs to track state but one user shouldn't be able to strain bandwidth any more than the same user with several simultaneous FTP or HTTP downloads. | |
|  |  |  |   John Galt Spricket24 Premium join:2004-09-30 Oceanside, OR
| Re: Utilization said by rradina :Granted, 10,000 connections per user could quickly get very stressful if the ISP has equipment in the middle that needs to track state... I think you answered your own question...
A network is much more than "just" bandwidth. -- A is A | |
|  |  |  |  |  backness
join:2005-07-08 K2P OW2
·Rogers Hi-Speed
·TekSavvy Solutions..
| Re: Utilization that is the sillyiest argument i have ever heard... blame the protocol?
why don't we blame html or some other tcp/ip for ruining the network?
Bittorrent is not the problem! People like to share content, or in other words they are looking online for services that are not provided by typical industries. As long as people like you take your outdated one way data flow concepts and apply them to everyone else, you are missing the whole information age!
The business model you are preaching is outdated just like haveing your newspaper sent to your house, or like traditional analogue TV signals! People of the future demande interactivity, which has a prerequisite for 2 way data flow! | |
|  |  |  |  |  |   MattE Obama '08 Premium join:2003-07-20 Jamestown, NC | Re: Utilization I demand you click the spell check button!  | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  backness
join:2005-07-08 K2P OW2 | Re: Utilization i was in a hurry  | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   envoid
join:2002-12-21 Duluth, GA
| said by John Galt :A network is much more than "just" bandwidth. It's not a big truck you just dump something on.... it's a series of tubes!! | |
|  |  |  |  Ahrenl
join:2004-10-26 North Andover, MA | With FUD. If you convince people it can/can't be done, then everyone will think that's the truth.
One user can not "suck down the whole pipe", unless that pipe is of the crack variety... which is obviously being used here.. | |
|  |  |  |   Combat Chuck Too Many Cannibals Premium join:2001-11-29 Verona, PA
| said by rradina :How can one customer with a 5/10/15Mbps pipe wipe out an ISP's infrastructure? Because it's not just one customer.
ISP's sell a standard residential package under the assumption that you aren't going to be using all your available bandwidth all the time. Bittorrent breaks that assumption because it does just that. So either the ISP's find ways to mitigate the bandwidth gobbling effects of BT, or they have to make connections more like a leased line.
Have you checked the price of a T1 lately? -- gau gau | |
|  |  |  |  |  rradina
join:2000-08-08 Chesterfield, MO
·Charter Pipeline
·Vonage
| Re: Utilization That's why I asked the question -- how many use BT? If only 2% use it and they consume 70% of the bandwidth (I'm skeptical about these figures but they aren't mine...that's what the article claims to be the top end...), then there's a disconnect. However, I'm not sure this won't always be the case. If not BT, it would be FTP. If not FTP, it would be UseNet. That's why I asked the second question. If BT was banned, what would be the total network utilization? Would it be 30%, 50% or would it still be 100% because BT is so pervasive that it starves other protocols?
I also thought the Internet 2 proved that QOS doesn't work. They eventually just added more bandwidth and made everyone happy. | |
|  |  |  |  |  rradina
join:2000-08-08 Chesterfield, MO
·Charter Pipeline
·Vonage
| Oh -- I forgot to add one thing. Do ISPs assume a T1 "leased line" customer will use their bandwidth 100% of the time or do they also oversubscribe their backbone to the Internet?
Also -- why would FTTN/FTTH and DOCSIS2 projects provide 15Mbps, 30Mbps or even greater speeds if they didn't intend people to use it? Do they assume these will only be used in "burst" situations? I can't imagine browsing ever needing burst rates this high. If they provide the bandwidth, people will use it. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |   Combat Chuck Too Many Cannibals Premium join:2001-11-29 Verona, PA
| Re: Utilization said by rradina :If not BT, it would be FTP. If not FTP, it would be UseNet. That's why I asked the second question. If BT was banned, what would be the total network utilization? Would it be 30%, 50% or would it still be 100% because BT is so pervasive that it starves other protocols? I don't know what the utilization would be but the reality is BT is much more efficient at maximizing the amount of bandwidth it uses and your not going to find anyone worth believing that will say that FTP can push the massive amount of data per second that a torrent can.
said by rradina :Do ISPs assume a T1 "leased line" customer will use their bandwidth 100% of the time or do they also oversubscribe their backbone to the Internet? I'm not sure but I imagine that they do oversell to a certain extent; but they're going to be much more conservative about it if up-times and speeds are guaranteed by the contract. -- gau gau | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  rradina
join:2000-08-08 Chesterfield, MO
·Charter Pipeline
·Vonage
| Re: Utilization Even though BT uses multiple connections to mitigate speed-robbing latency, the architecture attacks the last 20% of bandwidth and solves the central server bandwidth problem by multiplexing streams from multiple peers. Unless you're willing to say that FTP is not at least 80% efficient at consuming bandwidth, it would still lay waste to an ISP's backbone if everyone used it at the same time.
My original question still stands. If not BT, what?
So far arguments for banning/shaping/throttling BT are similar to blaming SUVs as the reason our gas prices are so high. Granted, SUVs aren't as efficient as a car but if they were gone, does anyone believe the SUV folks wouldn't still need to drive something that consumed almost as much gas?
In my opinion, the real issue here is the backbone providers fear being relegated to a dumb pipe. The technology to move a lot of bytes is cheap and mature. As a result, the price of bandwidth is cheap and competitive. As HSI nears its maximum penetration potential, revenue growth will only be achieved by raising prices or stealing customers. Even then, opportunities for revenue growth will be marginal. At some point, a backbone provider will not be able to survive without diversifying. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   Combat Chuck Too Many Cannibals Premium join:2001-11-29 Verona, PA
| Re: Utilization said by rradina :Unless you're willing to say that FTP is not at least 80% efficient at consuming bandwidth, it would still lay waste to an ISP's backbone if everyone used it at the same time. How many people are going to set up FTP servers if they can't use BT? Not many. Then even if you do set one up there's the issue of advertising to the world that it exists. BT makes it trivially simple to serve files, find others serving the file you're trying to download, and keeping the download going when someone serving disappears.
As always reality trumps the lab results. -- Early to rise, early to bed; Makes a man healthy but socially dead. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  rradina
join:2000-08-08 Chesterfield, MO
·Charter Pipeline
·Vonage
| Re: Utilization This is a literal response to a conceptual proposition. I'm asking a conceptual question and have offered FTP as a conceptual example of what might happen in a BT-free world. To believe that your literal response to a conceptual example "trumps the lab results" doesn't convince me of anything.
Let me ask it this way -- do you believe in a hypothetical BT-free world that something else won't step in to consume nearly as much or just as much bandwidth? My argument is BT isn't the problem just as SUVs aren't the reason why we're paying $3+/gallon for gasoline. BT, unfortunately, is the most current argument used by backbone providers to spread FUD.
Consider the braniacs at ATT who are "tired of VOIP getting a free ride on their system" even though as bandwidth hogs go, VOIP is not much more than a 56K modem.
The question is whether or not ATT is allowed to govern VOIP traffic and favor IPTV unless your VOIP provider pays a premium to ensure QOS. Using the Internet2 as an example, I propose that it won't take long for everyone to pay a fee and at some point, everything will want priority and we'll be back to what we have today (best effort for all traffic). When this happens, the backbone providers will add more capacity but by that time all the B.S. premium fees will be in place and we'll be spending $50/month for VOIP.
I think such a scenario is not all that far from paying Guido a 5% sales fee to ensure the reliability of your pizzeria's cheese deliveries. The significant difference is that right now what ATT is planning is legal. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |   Combat Chuck Too Many Cannibals Premium join:2001-11-29 Verona, PA
| Re: Utilization said by rradina :I'm asking a conceptual question and have offered FTP as a conceptual example of what might happen in a BT-free world. To believe that your literal response to a conceptual example "trumps the lab results" doesn't convince me of anything. When talking real world issues, real world results always mean more than that that is theoretical.
I'm not arguing VOIP, I'm not arguing net neutrality. I'm saying BT is breaking an assumption that all residential service providers have made. To sit there and say, "well if everyone set up FTP servers and everyone knew about everyone else's FTP servers, they'd flood the connection too so the argument isn't valid" is ridiculous because people aren't going to set up FTP servers and the servers that are set up aren't going to be known to but a relative handful of people.
Quite frankly I'm not even sure what your point is anymore short of arguing that FTP can technically have a high throughput and has been around for a while so therefore Bittorrent isn't a problem; totally ignoring years of real world use of FTP on the internet. -- Early to rise, early to bed; Makes a man healthy but socially dead. | |
|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  rradina
join:2000-08-08 Chesterfield, MO
·Charter Pipeline
·Vonage
| Re: Utilization Holy cow. I apologize but I can't help myself. At this point, a Jethro Tull song is running through my head.
Original Message: ...What's the utilization if BT is completely removed?... 1st Response to you: ...If BT was banned, what would be the total network utilization?... 2nd Response to you: ...My original question still stands. If not BT, what?... 3rd Response to you: ...Let me ask it this way -- do you believe in a hypothetical BT-free world that something else won't step in to consume nearly as much or just as much bandwidth?
Since you cannot address the point, I'll do it. My point is, BT is a scapegoat. If BT wasn't around, something else would lay waste to pipes as long as ISPs keep adding last mile speed increases. They cannot keep doing that without adding bandwidth to the backbone. Net neutrality seeks to ensure that we add bandwidth, not fancy management schemes and fees.
If you still mention FTP in your response, don't expect another from me. | |
|  |  |  |  |   envoid
join:2002-12-21 Duluth, GA
| said by Combat Chuck :Have you checked the price of a T1 lately? The price of the T1 is mostly the installation/maintenance of the line and SLA (repair speed). It doesn't have much to do with the data speeds anymore. | |
|   TK Junk Mail Go ahead, make my day Premium join:2002-03-03 Margate City, NJ clubs:
·Comcast
| ISP's will NOT cache pirated content One obvious problem is that ISPs certainly won't be caching pirated content, which makes up the majority of Bit Torrent traffic. To control this traffic, they'll almost certainly continue to lean on traffic shaping - which leaves Cohen and company in a considerable quandary. And that is THE reason why bittorrent is going nowhere soon as a legitimate tool of ISPs. If Cohen wants to sell to ISPs, he better include a mechanism in his tool set to block all pirated content or he can forget going legit. -- -- Join Red Room Forum BLOG tkjunkmail.blogspot.com My Web Page | |
|  |   dvd536 as Mr. Pink as they come Premium join:2001-04-27 Phoenix, AZ | Re: ISP's will NOT cache pirated content ISP's cant even do NNTP decent. how does anyone think they can do this? LOL. -- You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth | |
|   AnotherPoster
@67.69.x.x
| RE Seems to me that caching BitTorrent data at the ISP level is no more different than newsgroups with retention, which is actually more efficient than the BT protocol. Well, Rogers [Canadian ISP] has already shown their interest there and probably a few other ISPs too, so whats the point? Not that I dont blame the guy for trying, but hes fighting an uphill battle. BitTorrent has already earned the synonym for Piracy. | |
|   ftthz If love can kill hate can also save
join:2005-10-17 | minority bt legit usage guessing for legit bt will be to host software, video, etc that people want to share but don't have the bandwith to distribute themselves ... | |
|  |   FiL Premium join:2005-08-16 Silver Spring, MD
| Re: minority bt legit usage "Users are getting around the traffic shaping by changing ports and employing clients that use encryption, something Bram Cohen argued wasn't the "solution" back in January. This isn't Cohen's preferred solution, clearly, because it ruins the company's financial plans. Cohen, eager to get on the right side of ISPs, has been selling the idea of caching Bit Torrent content to ISPs in order to reduce network strain."
So, in essense, this guy and his goon squad figured out a away to send data over the net without going "through" all the headaches the Napsters and such of the world went through, got bullied into submission by the ISP's throttling all of our torrents, and then they say to the public they were supposed to be supporting "dont try to figure out a way around the throttles; it is what it is...
Moral of the story- Greed conquers all. Let the Torrent team burn just like the MPAA/RIAA goons their trying to find "middle ground" with.
They basically played the public; Get em on your side then backstab em when the money starts flowing. But its more of a poke since their still sucking teet, trying to get that mula. ehhh... | |
|  |  |  Alphy
join:2001-12-31 Troy, MI | Re: minority bt legit usage Very well said. Thumbs up. | |
|  |  |   Combat Chuck Too Many Cannibals Premium join:2001-11-29 Verona, PA
| said by FiL :They basically played the public; Get em on your side then backstab em when the money starts flowing. But its more of a poke since their still sucking teet, trying to get that mula. ehhh... Come on, that's ridiculous. How is he stabbing everyone in the back? He has his own client that he writes; if you don't like the way his works there are plenty of others to choose from.
You're just PO'd that he has the nerve to try to make money off his creation, particularly because you latched onto that creation as some sort of banner for your cause. You go ahead and continue sitting there oblivious to the fact that your plight is caused by your ridiculous punk-rock groupie philosophy. -- gau gau | |
|  |  |  |   envoid
join:2002-12-21 Duluth, GA
| Re: minority bt legit usage said by Combat Chuck :Come on, that's ridiculous. How is he stabbing everyone in the back? He has his own client that he writes; if you don't like the way his works there are plenty of others to choose from. I thought the whole caching thing was becoming part of the BT protocol, meaning other clients will most likely add support for it.
IMO, I think Cohen is turning face with finding middle-ground with the AA's. But hell, why not try to make money off of your creation? Despite this, I think he has many hills to climb to get ISPs to keep large BT caching servers. | |
|  |  |  |  |   Combat Chuck Too Many Cannibals Premium join:2001-11-29 Verona, PA
| Re: minority bt legit usage said by envoid :I thought the whole caching thing was becoming part of the BT protocol, meaning other clients will most likely add support for it. I'm sure they will as there is no reason not to except as some sort of protest. But it's not going to break clients that choose not to. I imagine most of the popular clients will make it an option to turn it off.
My point is Brahm isn't coming to your house with a pike and forcing you (at pike point) to do anything. I guess I just don't get this hero thing people like to assign to others. -- Early to rise, early to bed; Makes a man healthy but socially dead. | |
|  |  |  |  |  dslpartner
join:2005-02-18
| said by envoid : Despite this, I think he has many hills to climb to get ISPs to keep large BT caching servers. Not if it is cheaper than to cache than to provide the bandwith. -- "Perl is executable line noise, Python is executable pseudo-code." | |
|  | |  |
|
|