10.pando p4 p laird popkin
DESCRIPTION
Presentation on P2P, ISP's and P4P from the European Peering Forum 2007. Note that the simulations (AT&T and Abilene) were performed using publicly available BGP routing data, not ISP-provided network maps.TRANSCRIPT
Pando Confidential
®
Can P2P and ISP’s Work Together?Laird Popkin, CTO, Pando Networks
November 2007
Overview
• Pando & P2P– Business– Technology– What are ISP’s telling us?– How can we work with ISP’s?
• P4P– Who is in the P4P Working Group?– The goals– Results so far– Next steps
2 Confidential
The Opportunity of P2P
“Within five years, all media will be delivered
across the Internet.”
- Steve Ballmer, CEO MicrosoftD5 Conference, June 2007
The Internet is the media delivery platform of the future
New technologies are needed to scale the Internet for higher quality media delivery
P2P networks present a disruptive market opportunity
3 Confidential
Nascent P2P Market (before 2007)
“File Sharing” application
Rogue technology
Stand alone P2P applications
Pando.com, free consumer app.
Commercial P2P Market (2007+)
“Content Delivery” mechanism
P2P becomes part of content delivery infrastructure
Content owners prefer to buy integrated P2P + CDN solution
Major content and CDN players select P2P technology partners
Maturing P2P Market
4 Confidential
Total Installs >15M Daily Media Deliveries >500K
30 Day Online Nodes30 Day Active Nodes
Pando is a Proven Platform
6 Confidential
Swarm Efficiency
Managed P2P:• Control Servers
– Secure, Coordinate, Control, Report
• CDN Servers– Reliable
• P2P Clients– Efficient
15 Confidential
Managed P2P:Control Servers
Secure, Coordinate, Control, Report
CDN ServersReliable
P2P ClientsEfficient
8 Confidential
How is Pando different from “generic” P2P?
Secure, Controlled
Distributed NetworkEfficient & Scalable
Central Server
Managed Peer to Peer Infrastructure
Monetization PlatformDynamic & Targeted
Pando is a Market Leader
• CDN Peer Assist• Pando and CDN’s pay for transit to provide reliability, performance
• P2P streaming• P2P boost for progressive download/playback of FLV, QT, WMV, etc.
• Managed Network• Reporting, control, DMCA takedowns, etc.
• Integrates into applications and web services (APIs)• Proven scale and network efficiency
• More “edge” than any “Edge Network”• Partnering with CDNs and selling directly• Pricing and QOS disruptive to large and growing market
Pando Unique Value Proposition
7 Confidential
9 Confidential
P2P HTTP
“CDN Peering”P2P + HTTP
Performance and Efficiency Optimized Throughout Content
Demand Curve
CDN PeerAssist (Marketing Diagram)
Con
tent
Dem
and
Large, popular files
Hi Resolution content (HD)
RSS media subscriptions
Game/software downloads
CDN PeerAssist (Real Data)
5.00%
28.75%
52.50%
76.25%
100.00%
1000+ 100 - 999 10 - 99 1 - 9
14.00%
57.00%
94.00%100.00%
Network Efficiency By Swarm Size
10 Confidential
# of nodes in swarm
% of datadelivered by peer cloud vs. CDN.
“Pando may represent the
future of media distribution.”
Pando’s Technical Differentiators
Pando Technology:• Cross-platform
– Core is portable C code. Supported on Windows, Mac and Linux.• Native binary
– efficient, embeddable. Platform-native GUI’s.
• Widely used – Well tested, proven scalability
• Web embedded through standard protocols– support any browser, any OS, any media player.
• Resilient p2p protocol uses best available channel:– Full P2P through HTTP tunneling through proxies, with auto-detection, – UDP and TCP hole punching through firewalls, etc.
• User are in control– can uninstall, set limits, etc. Result = 75% long-term retention rate.
• Partners are in control– Control all presentation, branding (Pando Media Booster).
• ISP-friendly P2P– Cache server integrations, P4P WG.
14 Confidential
Pando Client Architecture
Clients:• Pando stand-alone• Pando Media Booster• Pando Command LinePando integrates into:• Web Sites• Applications• Devices• Content ManagementPando is portable:• Windows• Mac OS X• Linux
17 Confidential
Network Protocols
Layered Protocol• Control:
– SOAP over SSL• Tracker
– TCP or UDP• Data Transfer
– TCP w/ STUNT– UDP w/ STUN– HTTP, Proxy
18 Confidential
What is Pando hearing from ISP’s?
Good:–P2P is a key reason that many customers get
broadband–Customers love Pando
• Some ISP’s are distributing “white label” Pando as a value-add to their customers
Bad:–P2P consumes all available resources –P2P is costing us too much to support
20 Confidential
Pando and ISP’s
What is Pando doing to work with ISP’s?• Pando pays for transit (for Pando-hosted content)• Unique protocol signature (Pando doesn’t hide)• Working with caching server vendors:
– Caching servers have up to 80% “hit rate”, provide great performance– But require ISP capital investment, so can’t be the only answer
• Make software smarter about ISP infrastructure– Attempts to reverse engineer structure are weak:
• AS mapping• /24 mapping• Ping times• Traceroutes
– So let’s get accurate knowledge from the ISP’s!• Thus P4P.
21 Confidential
P4P: Partnership between ISP’s and P2P Networks
Laird Popkin, Co-Chair, P4P Working Group
P4P
22 Confidential
Core GroupAT&TBitTorrentCisco SystemsGrid NetworksJoostLimeWireManatt
ObserversAbacastCablevisionCacheLogicCox CommunicationsComcastMPAANBC UniversalOversiPeerAppTime Warner CableTurner Broadcasting
23 Confidential
P4P Working Group
P4P Working Group: Co-Chaired by Pando and Verizon, based on research from Yale, hosted by Distributed Computing Industry Association.
Pando NetworksRawFlowTelefonica GroupVeriSignVerizonWashington UniversityYale University
• Motivation• P4P framework
• Design rationale• System architecture• Computing peering suggestions
• Evaluations• Ongoing work
Roadmap
24 Confidential
Confidential
25
P2P : The Significant Bandwidth Consumer
• Traffic– Up to 60-70% of Internet traffic is contributed by P2P applications [CacheLogic]– Random peering causes traffic spread across POPs and domains
• Problems– Increased network resource usage (e.g., using bandwidth of more links)– Increased network operational costs – Degraded performance of other applications
Bandwidth Battle between ISPs and P2P
ISP’s Address P2PUpgrade Network InfrastructureDeploy P2P Caching DevicesTerminate User ConnectivityRate Limit P2P Trafficetc.
P2P CountermeasuresUse random portsEncrypt trafficetc.
The battle results in a lose-lose situation
26 Confidential
Confidential
27
Where is the Fundamental Problem?
• Traditional ISP feedback/control to application traffic:– Routing– Rate control through congestion feedback (packet drops)
• These are ineffective for P2P– Due to highly dynamic, scattered traffic pattern caused by
dynamic, unguided (network-oblivious) peer selection
• Need a mechanism for ISPs to communicate with P2P about network structure and policies
Confidential
28
Objective
• Design a framework to enable better ISP and P2P coordination– ISPs and P2P jointly decide P2P peer selection
• Guided P2P connections should yield benefits:– Improve throughput to P2P users– Allow ISP’s to manage link utilization
• Reduce congestion for capped links• Reduce link costs for non-capped links• Push traffic from (expensive/limited) external links to internal
links
29 Confidential
Network Awareness redefines P2P
Network Aware P2P will reduce costs, improve performance
Network Aware P2P Platform
Traditional CDN
More Viewers =Better performanceLower cost
More Viewers =Worse performanceHigher cost
Most Limited
Most AvailableEdge Network
Regional Network
Internet Transit
Confidential
30
P4P Framework – Goals
• Performance improvement for both ISPs and P2P• Scalability
– Support a large number of P2P users and networks in dynamic settings
• Privacy preservation• Flexibility: apply to many P2P architectures
– Application-specific requirements– Tracker-based and trackerless P2P systems– “Gossip” among peers
• Ease of implementation (“low hanging fruit”)• Open standard: any ISP, P2P can easily implement it
Confidential
31
ISP A
P4P in Tracker-based P2P (e.g. BitTorrent)
1 4
3
2
pTracker iTracker
peer
• Use BitTorrent in a single ISP as an example
– pTracker runs P2P system– iTracker makes suggestions
for peering relationships• Information flow:
– 1. peer queries pTracker– 2. pTracker asks iTracker for
guidance (occasionally)– 3. iTracker returns high-level
peering suggestions– 4. pTracker selects and
returns a set of active peers, according to the suggestions
iTracker can be run by trusted third parties, or P2P networks, or ISP’s.
Confidential
33
Compute Suggested Peering Relationships
• Formulate as a joint optimization problem– ISP’s objective: minimize maximum link utilization– P2P’s objective: maximize throughput
34
Results
Evaluated P4P approach via simulations and experiments:• Simulations
– Discrete-event simulation• a module for modeling BitTorrent protocol• a module for modeling underlying network topology and data
transfer dynamics using TCP rate equation– Network topology: PoP-level Abilene and AT&T topologies– Network routing: OSPF routing
• PlanetLab experiments– 53 Internet2 nodes on PlanetLab– iTracker for Abilene network– Use OSPF routing to re-construct traffic load on Abilene links
Evaluation – Abilene Simulation
P4P yields over 2x speed increase!
Abilene Simulation Results: Good for P2P Networks
35 Confidential
Evaluation – Abilene SimulationP4P yields over 2x drop in external link utilization! (and for ½ the time!)
Abilene Simulation Results: Good for ISP’s
36 Confidential
37
AT&T Simulation Results Confirm
Confirmed on AT&T model:• P4P resulted in:
– 1.6x faster completion– 3x lower link utilization
• Native P2P can result in some peers experiencing very long download completion time
• P4P can result in much lower variance in link utilization
37 Confidential
37
PlanetLab Implementation Confirms
Implemented on PlanetLab:• Implemented P4P in BT Tracker, etc.• Run on 53 PlanetLab nodes for 900 seconds• Liveswarms is BT-based video streaming• P4P resulted in: over 2x lower link utilization
37 Confidential
LinkUtilization
BTBT+P4P
Swarm Size
Interested?
38 Confidential
Interested in P4P?
P4P WG is free to join.Email [email protected] or [email protected] phone callsWorking Group mission:Evaluate the P4P design through large-scale experimentsFormalize and promote adoption of P4P protocolsServe as a forum for ISP’s and P2P networks
Questions?