Quote:
Originally Posted by johnholmes
|
Now that is interesting because AIUI when explained to me several years ago, it was based on a 25% reserve downstream bandwidth capacity?
The Allot/DART servers were also placed on backbone peering points as at the time this reduced the incoming cost between ISP's.
The above seems more plausible in terms of compromising on net neutrality for incoming bandwidth at network edge?
The main reason facing VM/ISP's is as we all should know that P2P overlay is completely independent of the classical "client-server" paradigm.
Some extracts from a now somewhat old 2010 white paper illustrates this:
However in recent years VM announced the (Allot)DART servers were being re-dispositioned towards the core. So what has changed? Well the explosion of upstream demand perhaps is one thing which also begs the question of two opposing philosophies:
1. Net neutrality and protocol agnostic
2. Fair distribution of capacity between users
One wonders whether the P2P traffic limited/contained within ISP internal network has now become more of a significant cost than inter-ISP peering costs?
Perversely containing more of P2P traffic internally would therefore be more cost effective for ISP anyway?
However despite the P2P methodology apportioning upstream bandwidth between peers, as we measure this more granularly then even the limited upstream capacity must therefore come under pressure?
So is VM moving DART towards the end user in order to now regulate the upstream more than just downstream previously? After all regulating seeders upstream on internal P2P would both regulate internal leechers down stream but also the external transit costs to other ISP's?
Or far more likely have I missed something obvious? Forthcoming P4P perhaps?
Ref:
The Network Operator's Perspective on Peer-to-Peer: Business Threats or Opportunities?