Network end users to pull down 2 gigabytes a day, continuously?

Sean Donelan sean at
Tue Jan 9 17:31:38 UTC 2007

On Tue, 9 Jan 2007, Gian Constantine wrote:
> Those numbers are reasonably accurate for some networks at certain times. 
> There is often a back and forth between BitTorrent and NNTP traffic. Many 
> ISPs regulate BitTorrent traffic for this very reason. Massive increases in 
> this type of traffic would not be looked upon favorably.
> If you considered my previous posts, you would know I agree streaming is 
> scary on a large scale, but unicast streaming is what I reference. Multicast 
> streaming is the real solution. Ultimately, a global multicast network is the 
> only way to deliver these services to a large market.

Which is why ISPs will see all of the above.  There will be 
store-and-forward video, streaming video, on demand video, real-time 
interactive video, and probably 10 other types I can't think of.

The concern for university or ISP networks isn't that some traffic uses 
70% of their network, its that 5% of the users is using 70%, 80%, 90%, 
100% of their network regardless of what that traffic is. It isn't 
"background" traffic using "excess" capacity, it peaks at the same time
as other peak traffic times.  P2P congestion isn't constrained to a
single transit bottleneck, it causes bottlenecks in every path local
and transit.  Local congestion is often more of a concern than transit.

The big question is whether the 5% of the users will continue to pay
for 5% of the network, or if they use 70% of the network will they pay
for 70% of the network?  Will 95% of the users see their prices fall 
and 5% of the users see their prices rise?

More information about the NANOG mailing list