1 / 14

P2P Media Summit Silicon Valley August 4, 2008 Jeff Capone

P2P Media Summit Silicon Valley August 4, 2008 Jeff Capone. Trends in peer-to-peer. Where do we see peer-to-peer headed?. Peer-to-peer is shifting from applications to infrastructure. Tomorrow. Yesterday. Today. Distributed file system. P2P Web. Voluntary Infrastructure. Core

derica
Télécharger la présentation

P2P Media Summit Silicon Valley August 4, 2008 Jeff Capone

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. P2P Media Summit Silicon Valley August 4, 2008 Jeff Capone

  2. Trends in peer-to-peer Where do we see peer-to-peer headed?

  3. Peer-to-peer is shifting from applications to infrastructure Tomorrow Yesterday Today Distributed file system P2P Web Voluntary Infrastructure Core Infrastructure Applications Content distribution Infrastructure on which next generation applications are built Applications bundled with infrastructure Task oriented (e.g., sharing files) Grid computing

  4. Peer-to-peer is being used for public and private access Peer-to-Peer • Content sharing applications • BitTorrent, Gnutella, Kazaa • Public content distribution1 • Typically non-web content • Multicasting • Veoh, Joost • Mainly used for public content distribution • Maybe used for live streams Public Private • Peer-to-peer networking • Skype, Leaf Networks, Pando Networks • Private content distribution • VoIP, IPOP (IP over P2P), file sharing (SMB, CIFS), DLNA 1. Similar technology is being used to create private sharing networks

  5. The type of distribution drives network design • Public distribution • Uses “public” infrastructure • Private nodes need to become part of the public infrastructure • Broadcast to millions (not considering long tail content) • Available all the time • Private distribution • Uses private infrastructure • Traditionally LAN but maybe a virtual or overlay infrastructure • Delivered to few • Available most of the time

  6. Differences in public and private peer-to-peer network design • Public • Centered around content • Tracking content • Delivery designed around a well-seeded network • High direct connection rate not required • Multiple instances of same content • May use super nodes (public infrastructure) • Private • Focused on node tracking • Presence and availability • Delivery typically point-to-point • High connection rate required • Single instance of an endpoint • May not use super nodes but may use relay servers

  7. Distribution of public content • Demand • A single Nielsen Rating2 point =1,128,000 streams • Assume a 1 Mbps per stream is over 1 TBps for a single Nielsen Rating point • Not sure how time shifting effects Nielsen Rating • Will a 40/50 rating every be possible with traditional (unicast) approaches? • Delivery - only solution is Multicasting • IP level multicasting • Are the economic incentives in place for it to happen? • Virgin radio, BBC trails with many ISPs in UK • Application level multicasting • Quality of service (QoS) has been limited by lack of resources • Take hybrid approach • Competition • Is peer-to-peer free? • What happens is the price of bandwidth approaches zero? 2. Rating are based in the percentage of home tuned in at the time of broadcast

  8. Distribution of private content • Demand • Only from one or few users • Deliver • Peer-to-peer over LANs has been used for years • VoIP, folder sharing, printer sharing, UPnP, etc. • Virtual peer-to-peer LAN over the Internet • Use public infrastructure like BitTorrent • Application specific overlay such as VoIP • Social networks/Facebook • Not true peer-to-peer • Peer-to-peer platform • Identify endpoint, open connection, close connection • Competition • IPv6?

  9. The future of peer-to-peer What will peer-to-peer look like in the future?

  10. End users will be unaware of delivery mechanism • CDN, P2P or Hybrid - should it matter? Do users care? • Not as long as there is sufficient quality of service CDN OR P2P

  11. Public website will use a combination of public servers and peer-to-peer for the delivery of private content Facebook Game Lobby applications allows users to play head-to-head LAN games

  12. Embedded devices will give peer-to-peer the foothold to adequately deliver both public and private content INTERNET INTERNET Private Public

  13. Leaf Networks background • Founded in 2004 originally as a peer-to-peer content delivery network • Had difficulty finding professional content to distribute • Signed up a religious congregation • In early 2005 focus shifted enabling communications when otherwise not possible • Focused on NAT/firewall traversal • Private networking/IP over P2P • Peer-to-peer routing and TCP performance tuning • Free consumer version and license the technology • Consumer networking equipment • SMB software applications • Content Delivery Networks

  14. Multiple peer-to-peer product offerings • Leaf: Free consumer messenger style application • Leaf Plug-in SDK: Enables other software developers to user the API to build peer-to-peer applications over existing Leaf networks • SDK plug-in extension to the consumer application • Leaf Web: allows Web developers to take advantage of P2P capabilities using basic JavaScript or Flash programming • Leaf Platform: is the core P2P and network formation technology used to easily deliver networking applications such as file sharing and video multicasting • Cross-platform P2P networking library

More Related