I've spoken to a number of ISPs over the past year who are using P2P caching products, and they all stated that they were seeing benefits from them.

You're correct in that there's probably a lot of data which is only requested once (just like a HTTP cache), but there will also be files which could be downloaded dozens of hundreds of more of times - and 100 downloads of a 60 min TV shows (350MB) is 35GB of saved traffic - not a huge amount in the scheme of things, but multiple it out to a month or a year and the numbers get significant enough.

Most of these products also cache in both directions. ie, they will pull from the cache not only when one of your clients downloads a file from elsewhere on the Internet, but also when a host elsewhere on the Internet downloads from one or your clients. Depending on how you pay for your tail to the client the caching can have a saving not only on bandwidth out to the Internet but even on domestic tail costs.

As others have said, the copyright issue isn't really any different to that for a web cache.  Sure, you might suspect that there'd be a higher percentage of "illegal" material transfered over P2P than HTTP, but that doesn't mean it's all illegal...

Most/all of the caching products also give the ability to shape P2P traffic, which can be a good thing or a bad thing depending on how you manage it.  From memory Exetel in Australia openly admit that they shape P2P traffic during peak hours, but let it run free during quiet times, and that hasn't caused them any issues.  Comcast in the US on the other hand got taken to court for doing basically the same thing.  Most of the ISPs I've spoken to are doing some form of P2P shaping, although generally not signifant, and normally they don't make that fact known.

I'd say the majority of ISPs are still not doing P2P caching, although more and more are at least using it on part of their network.  If you'd asked me a few months ago I would have said that this number will increase over time, but at the moment in the US at least there seems to be a move away from P2P and back to HTTP/streaming protocols.  Why bothered downloading a P2P of a TV show when you can watch it on Hulu, InnerTube or YouTube?  Why bothered downloadind a movie when you can stream it form NetFlix?

  Scott.


On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 6:42 PM, Cameron Kerr <ckerr@cs.otago.ac.nz> wrote:
I'm updating my labnotes for my network management paper regarding the use of proxy caches, and previously I have pointed to the possibility of caching peer-to-peer traffic as shown in the paper Deconstructing the Kazaa Network

http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?coll=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE&id=837393

I would like to know whether or not caching of peer-to-peer is something that ISPs actually do today, and if not why not. I imagine there are probably some interesting legal interactions, but I'm eager to find out how industry is moving in this field.

-- 
Cameron Kerr <ckerr@cs.otago.ac.nz>
Teaching Fellow, Computer Science, University of Otago


_______________________________________________
NZNOG mailing list
NZNOG@list.waikato.ac.nz
http://list.waikato.ac.nz/mailman/listinfo/nznog