Beta

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Drop in P2P Traffic Attributed To Traffic Shaping

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 4 years ago | from the or-just-sneakier-options dept.

The Internet 251

An anonymous reader writes "A new report based on data from 100 US and European ISPs claims P2P traffic has dropped to around 20% of all Internet traffic. This is down from the 40% two years ago (also reported by the same company which sells subscriber traffic management equipment to ISPs). The report goes on to say the drop is likely due to continued, widespread ISP P2P shaping: 'In fact, the P2P daily trend is pretty much completely inverted from daily traffic. In other words, P2P reaches its low at 4pm when web and overall Internet traffic approaches its peak ... trend is highly suggestive of either persistent congestion or, more likely, evidence of widespread provider manipulation of P2P traffic rates.'"

cancel ×

251 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Rise in First posts attributed to traffic shaping (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271065)

you betcha!

Re:Rise in First posts attributed to traffic shapi (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271485)

Fact is:
- absolute P2P traffic volume is not dropping, it's just very slowly increasing
- absolute amount of HTTP traffic nearly doubled since 2007, thanks to major increase in online video and direct download services
=> many people often use DD today instead of P2P for filesharing
=> P2P percentage sharply decreased, not the absolute volume though

Re:Rise in First posts attributed to traffic shapi (1)

Jurily (900488) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271771)

- absolute P2P traffic volume is not dropping, it's just very slowly increasing

Why is it increasing only very slowly? Have the movies gotten smaller? The games perhaps? The downloaders fewer?

Or the more likely version, that ISP's are holding them back. I know they do it with me.

Re:Rise in First posts attributed to traffic shapi (1)

master5o1 (1068594) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271797)

that ISP's are holding them back.

= shaping and management.

Re:Rise in First posts attributed to traffic shapi (2, Insightful)

wisty (1335733) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271965)

GP says it's increasing slowly because the technophiles already use it, and normal people just go to http://video.baidu.com/ [baidu.com]

Also, other big services (like, say, video chat, google maps, etc) are breaking into the mainstream.

A corollary (sorry, lemma ... my math is weak nowdays) to that argument is that most people don't want to wait for anything on the internet. If it doesn't start playing immediately (i.e. YouTube), nobody who hasn't heard of slashdot will watch it.

Re:Rise in First posts attributed to traffic shapi (1)

blackraven14250 (902843) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271967)

Games have stayed around the same size from year to year. The same has happened with movies and music. Only so much content is produced in a given year. Combined with the entire population that would be willing to download being actively engaged in it already, there won't be much growth.

Another possible cause (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271069)

There may be a "market saturation" effect. I know people who were downloading gigabytes a month (maybe a week) of songs and videos, but in the past year or two they have tapered off. They've gotten most of the stuff they've wanted, and now are just listening to and watching it.

Re:Another possible cause (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271093)

Yes, but that doesn't take into account the rise in quality. A lot of stuff is 720p and 1080p now.

Re:Another possible cause (4, Interesting)

Barny (103770) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271403)

You forget to factor in that the vast majority of the "good stuff" is old, so people have now gotten all the "good stuff" and now just trickle download the more rare "new good stuff".

I think what they should do is dump all the good movies and shit on one server, get it properly sorted, then once people have their huge fucking collection up to date we just RSYNC from there and get the latest, could even mirror it locally on ISPs to save on international bandwidth.

Re:Another possible cause (3, Insightful)

erroneus (253617) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271413)

Indeed. Many popular TV series are between seasons right now. This ridiculously long lapse between seasons is utterly destroying me! I have to think and use my mind now and sometimes it hurts!

Re:Another possible cause (4, Funny)

Barny (103770) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271431)

Ahh, I have the answer.

Head over to thepiratebay.org, grab all of season 1 of Full House.

This serves 2 purposes.

1, takes up the all important empty space in both your download queue and in your HDD

2, gives you something to delete when it comes time to "slim down my collection to save space" and you won't miss it

Just for the love of satan, don't watch the damn thing :)

Re:Another possible cause (2, Interesting)

negRo_slim (636783) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271129)

I know people who were downloading gigabytes a month (maybe a week) of songs and videos, but in the past year or two they have tapered off. They've gotten most of the stuff they've wanted, and now are just listening to and watching it.

From first hand experience I can agree with that to a degree, however I believe it's a multitude of factors playing out here.Traffic Shaping as well as more aggressive bandwidth caps and the increased availability of residential low priced, low allowance pay per GB plans and perhaps to a lesser to degree more people getting more things done with mobile data plans (iphone, non wifi laptop access). That being said, I've found the speed of my torrents at any time of the day much greater than say a year ago.

Re:Another possible cause (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271151)

For most normal users, it's all about convenience.

I would say that it's probably more due to people shifting towards audio/video streaming sites (such as youtube) when they want to hear the odd music, instead of having to resort to looking for and downloading the whole album via P2P.

Of course, given this new increased consumption of bandwidth by HTTP video streaming, VoIP, online games (which probably induce congestion during the day)... ISPs prefer to aggressively throttle all P2P traffic, which could also help explain this fact (besides the obvious fact that people seem to be using bandwidth these days for things other than P2P simply due to an increase in the availability of content by other means).

Re:Another possible cause (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271203)

Interestingly enough, I discovered a few days ago that my ISP offers access to its own "free unlimited downloads music website" to all their broadband subscribers (without any additional charges), which again suggests that P2P networks are seen as dangerous not because they distribute content for free, but because they are free to distribute without corporate control.

Re:Another possible cause (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271819)

FM Radio - Try-before-buy for music.
TV - Well, for me it doesn't work as well as if I've watched it, I am less likely to want to watch it again. But same idea as radio.
Then I would buy/borrow the CD / DVD etc.


On the Internet:
YouTube replaces Radio + TV (to a certain extent, of course).
P2P and other file sharing sources replaces the CD/DVD :|

Re:Another possible cause (4, Insightful)

AmiMoJo (196126) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271193)

The reason is obvious - there are now easier ways to get free music. Just go to last.fm or Spotify.

Finally we are seeing sites that "get it" and can successfully compete with free.

Re:Another possible cause (3, Interesting)

alx5000 (896642) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271365)

Or maybe, like I've done, people are switching back to direct downloading.

Why waste your time installing and setting up an application (incl. firewall settings), when you can pay 55 euro por a year of rapidshare and download anything from anywhere?

eMule used to be really popular in Spain, with elinks flooding forums all around. Now it's all rapidshare, megaupload, easyshare...

Re:Another possible cause (4, Insightful)

blackraven14250 (902843) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271989)

Because uTorrent is a no install, 30 seconds to port forward one port program that's completely free? If you have trouble setting up uTorrent, you don't belong here.

ISP awareness (3, Insightful)

GarretSidzaka (1417217) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271077)

there has to be more to this. obviously the ISP's are very aware of P2P networks. They market this in commercials that say "download music at increased rates!" which are in context about purchasing mp3's but belie the fact that they provide infrastructure to P2P networks, and anti-IP scenes.

And im not saying that this is a bad thing...

Re:ISP awareness (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271141)

Traffic shaping reflects the classic tension between the need to provide a product people want and the imperative to cut costs. ISPs obviously want to be able to offer faster lines than their competitors, but the fact that people who buy those lines do so to _use_ them means that this ends up costing the ISP money.
 
However, the P2P debate allows ISPs an out of sorts: since the *IAAs have invested so much into the normative debate over software piracy and are currently winning that debate (outside of the /. echo chamber, of course), it offers ISPs a way out from under the costs of what they have agreed to provide. They can simply use the red herring of "piracy == bad" to distract from the fact that they are not providing what they have sold.
 
Of course, they will soon find that the dividend from this behavior evaporates as all of the competition catches on and does the same thing, then they will be stuck with maintaining a traffic shaping infrastructure long after pirates have subverted it.

Re:ISP awareness (3, Informative)

Animaether (411575) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271461)

tangentially related to your post...

A major ISP in NL, Ziggo, has changed their commercials from "download movies" to "download movie trailers". I guess they felt pressure somewhere. Which is a bit silly as there -are- movie 'rental' places online where it would definitely be legal to download movies - even if downloading movies wasn't already legal under current law anyway. (distributing is another matter)

Re:ISP awareness (4, Interesting)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271909)

You're right. There IS more to this. What has happened over the last two years? People have spent more time downloading videos off hulu.com or youtube.com or other video-sharing sites,

As a result overall traffic has gone up, while peer-to-peer has remained relatively steady. Therefore P2P has dropped relative to all the other traffic on the web, even though people are still downloading the same amount as always.

in other news... (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271079)

... usenet usage has grown to 25% of all internet traffic. people move on (or in this case back) to safer technologies. the xIAA are targeting P2P users, so people move away from P2P.

what's traffic shaping got to do with it?

Re:in other news... (4, Funny)

sgbett (739519) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271389)

shh you!

Re:in other news... (2, Interesting)

wild_quinine (998562) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271661)

the xIAA are targeting P2P users, so people move away from P2P. what's traffic shaping got to do with it?

All the non-techie people I know continue to use P2P like it was the year 2000. It's only the people who know their oats that use any other services or protocols, and most of those guys switched when Metallica went apeshit at the start of the century.

Nothing changed over the xIAA lawsuits, as far as I can tell.

Re:in other news... (1)

Swizec (978239) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271901)

the xIAA are targeting P2P users, so people move away from P2P. what's traffic shaping got to do with it?

All the non-techie people I know continue to use P2P like it was the year 2000. It's only the people who know their oats that use any other services or protocols, and most of those guys switched when Metallica went apeshit at the start of the century.

Nothing changed over the xIAA lawsuits, as far as I can tell.

Or, which is likelier, most peopel just switched to encrypted p2p, which means that even if they know it looks like p2p traffic, they can't sue you over it because it's illegal to prove there was something illegal inside the encrypted traffic.

Problem solved.

Re:in other news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271923)

While I doubt that Usenet is what most people use, Usenet that caries binary groups is after all a payed service, the number of free download sites and streaming sites has increased a lot. Why bother with P2P when you can directly stream or download the newest movies with a single click? On top of that this frees you from a lot of possible legal trouble, as you are no longer on uploader.

Re:in other news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271663)

Can anybody reccomend a good feed? I don't mind paying for quality.

If quality is what you are after... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271973)

Can anybody reccomend a good feed? I don't mind paying for quality.

... then you need to check these guys out. Yes sir, the best feeds around.

I doubt shaping.... (1, Redundant)

warp_kez (711090) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271103)

More likely that mummy and daddy are home, and forcing little Timmy/Tammy to do their homework.

Re:I doubt shaping.... (1)

CarpetShark (865376) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271407)

More likely that mummy and daddy are home, and forcing little Timmy/Tammy to do their homework.

That explanation I doubt, somehow.

In other news (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271107)

spam increased from 20% to 40%.

Scheduling (4, Interesting)

Spad (470073) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271111)

Much more likely people are rescheduling their P2P downloads to run outside of peak hours. I know my ISP (Virgin Media) throttles connection speeds during peak hours, so I schedule anything I want to download to run outside of those times.

Re:Scheduling (1)

JDeane (1402533) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271139)

true also its a pain to surf while some torrent is sucking up all your bandwidth.... reminds me of being back on dial up. Of course some of the better P2P aps self throttle while you surf.

Re:Scheduling (1)

Gouyoku (1624711) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271551)

I find that cFosSpeed [www.cfos.de] helps a lot with this problem.

Re:Scheduling (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271969)

>>>pain to surf while some torrent is sucking up all your bandwidth.... reminds me of being back on dial up

All you have to do is dial-down your Torrent software's speed to 60 kilobyte/second. That's what I do which allows me 25 KB/s for browsing.... or about five times faster than dialup.

Re:Scheduling (2, Interesting)

TheKidWho (705796) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271999)

60kb/s?? Jeez, I could dial it to 1MB/s and still have bandwidth to spare O_O

Re:Scheduling (2, Informative)

supernova_hq (1014429) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271187)

BINGO!
When p2p started out, few people understood the benefits of self-throttling during the day. If I let my torrents run during the day, everyone in my house can feel it so I have it throttled down. Then from midnight to 7:00am, it unthrottles and blasts away at full speed.

Dial-up a decade ago (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271847)

When p2p started out, few people understood the benefits of self-throttling during the day.

When p2p first started out a decade ago, a lot of users were still on metered dial-up, and people downloaded singles, not albums. It just wasn't practical for a P2P program to dial the internet, search for a song that may or may not be available at a given moment, download it, and automatically shut down the PPP link.

Re:Dial-up a decade ago (1)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271991)

I download over dialup when traveling. It takes about 7 hours per television episode, or 3 episodes per day... just enough to keep me busy after getting back from the job.

Re:Scheduling (0, Offtopic)

cherishyou (1628975) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271211)

the website looks a lot in disorder ,need improvement http://www.igolfyoo.com/ [igolfyoo.com]

Isn't much worth downloading as of late. (4, Insightful)

r6_jason (893331) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271119)

There really hasn't been all that much worth downloading as of late. You can only download the classics so many times, the new content coming out just isn't all that good, be it games, movies or music. I'm sure we'll see a small up tick when the new Star Trek movie hits the underground though.

Re:Isn't much worth downloading as of late. (2, Insightful)

Fotograf (1515543) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271611)

that is also a way to fight piracy! Make less and worse stuff. Good point ?IAA!

Re:Isn't much worth downloading as of late. (1)

zipherx (1150327) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271657)

You really have a point, it has been pretty useless lately...

Re:Isn't much worth downloading as of late. (1)

wild_quinine (998562) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271673)

There really hasn't been all that much worth downloading as of late... the new content coming out just isn't all that good, be it games, movies or music.

Finally, an anti-piracy strategy that might actually have an effect. This could save the industry!

Rise in paid downloading? (1)

ElGanzoLoco (642888) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271121)

Or could it also be that paid-for downloads and streaming audio and video have increased, thus decreasing the share of P2P traffic in the total?

(No I didn't RTFA, it's way too early for that)

The only thing killing p2p in the UK is Spotify. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271123)

Even my CD collection is gathering dust, finally music streaming that just works.

Poor analysis (5, Insightful)

Zouden (232738) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271149)

"The report goes on to say the drop is likely due to continued, widespread ISP P2P shaping"

The data allows no such conclusion to be drawn. In fact, since all they've done is compared P2P as a percent of total traffic, it's probably more likely that the total traffic has increased.

Re:Poor analysis (5, Insightful)

rawls (1462507) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271227)

The data for this report was taken during week days in July, when most big TV series are on a break (and as a consequence there is a lot less to download).

Whereas (although I couldn't find anything specifying the actual dates) the data for the study two years ago seems to have been taken earlier in the year.

Re:Poor analysis (2, Interesting)

JohnnyBGod (1088549) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271597)

Also, video-sharing sites have had explosive growth in the last two-years, so it's normal that P2P is a smaller percentage of the total, now.

Re:Poor analysis (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271869)

The data for this report was taken during week days in July, when most big TV series are on a break (and as a consequence there is a lot less to download).

Screw TV; July is the time for cams and telesyncs of theatrical blockbusters.

Re:Poor analysis (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271937)

The bulk of internet users are still in the northern hemisphere too (EU, US, Canada, Japan, S Korea). July is also when colleges are quieter than usual, and people in general aren't doing download activities during the summer (rather go to the beach, etc.).

Other reading (1)

gmuslera (3436) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271195)

Streaming audio and video implies a lot of traffic, and got more popular since 2 years ago, the shape of traffic could had varied. And some of that streaming could had covered some of the areas where p2p was popular, like series, movies, and music.

The other 80% (5, Funny)

KreAture (105311) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271201)

...is ofcource spam and porn.

Can we do traffic-shaping of spam?
If so I suggest this shedule:
12pm-8am: 100% drop
8am-4pm: 100% drop
4pm-12pm: 100% drop

Re:The other 80% (2, Interesting)

amias (105819) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271401)

i dont know which internet you are surfing but round here its all turned to kittens

Re:The other 80% (2)

Dan541 (1032000) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271583)

Delete your MX records, I guarantee a 100% drop in spam.

Re:The other 80% (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271861)

Can we do traffic-shaping of spam?
If so I suggest this shedule:
12pm-8am: 100% drop
8am-4pm: 100% drop
4pm-12pm: 100% drop

Certainly. Ask your e-mail provider about installing blacklists.

It'll pick back up again. (1)

shaunol (1313685) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271217)

When all the good TV shows start back up again with new seasons around the end of September.
Probably with some good game and movie releases around the holiday period too.

Non P2P Substitute (2, Interesting)

zlel (736107) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271231)

Personally, while my demand for content has actually changed, I am also preferring streaming video to downloads. While content made available via tube sites are much more closely managed and gets deleted more frequently than before, fresh content goes on them more quickly than before. Watching RAWs has become a great substitute to recording. Quality used to be a bigger factor for me, but now it's more of instant gratification - pretty much like radio. The internet itself is now my library.

Re:Non P2P Substitute (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271879)

Personally, while my demand for content has actually changed, I am also preferring streaming video to downloads.

Conversely, people who are away from home more often than not and who can't afford $60 per month for a mobile data plan prefer downloads.

More reasonable explanation (5, Insightful)

CAIMLAS (41445) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271235)

So torrents used to compose 40% of traffic. Now it's 20%. What's changed in the last year?

* youporn.com and similar sites have popped up where they did not previously.
* hulu.com now exists.

That right there could easily cover 90% of people's media interests. Especially now that I'm not really into movies as much as I used to be (they suck more, and TV shows are, in some ways, getting better).

Re:More reasonable explanation (1)

jrhawk42 (1028964) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271347)

I agree it's very likely that p2p traffic stayed the same while other internet traffic increased dramatically (especially flash video based traffic).

Re:More reasonable explanation (3, Interesting)

4D6963 (933028) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271417)

Interesting, my main change in P2P habits is due to the fact that most of the stuff I want is on rapidshare or megaupload, so instead of searching on thepiratebay or eMule (which I hardly use anymore because of that), I search on filestube. I used to download torrents of entire seasons of TV shows, but now all I gotta do is find the episode I want on megaupload, and as soon as it starts downloading I start watching it by opening the .part file with VLC.

But as for the real cause of the difference between day and night, QoS? Seems obvious.. Nothing necessarily malicious coming from the ISPs, for one thing they're right to have QoS for more time-dependant traffic, and then if you yourself watch YouTube or download some files over HTTP then your P2P traffic is gonna take a hit.

Re:More reasonable explanation (1, Insightful)

skastrik (971221) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271693)

That right there could easily cover 90% of people's media interests. Especially now that I'm not really into movies as much as I used to be (they suck more, and TV shows are, in some ways, getting better).

You're getting older.

Part 2 of The Internet After Dark (1)

mrbene (1380531) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271239)

The rest of the story is here [arbornetworks.com] . It includes:

The answer: long after Exchange and Oracle business traffic slows to a crawl, Internet users turn to the web to surf, watch videos, send IM's and happily try to kill each other.

Usenet was ultimate, but too much spam. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271331)

Usenet was the ultimate way to contribute. It got hosed because of spam. Too many douchebags posting penis enlargement ads can ruin anything.

Usenet is the way bittorrent was meant to be. Bittorrent is like a dynamic Usenet protocol. Will usenet ever die? What's the point when there are only a handfull of news servers that can play nice?

R.I.P Usenet.

Re:Usenet was ultimate, but too much spam. (1)

amias (105819) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271409)

so you'll be sending me a login to your completely unrestricted NNTP server then ? no ? ok i'll stick with bittorrent then.

Re:Usenet was ultimate, but too much spam. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271659)

perfect, we need people like you to act as p2p bait and keep the xIAA away

Not less traffic, just different pipes (1)

Monolith1 (1481423) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271337)

It's because the cool kids are getting back into usenet through SSL pipes, and DDL.

Dissappointed. (1)

jaypaulb (1549621) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271355)

The entire /. community and not one single post explaining how to circumvent the shaping. Please help those less technically able amongst you.

Re:Dissappointed. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271411)

Move to a country where ISPs don't discriminate its customers.

Re:Dissappointed. (2, Insightful)

sgbett (739519) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271419)

http://www.google.com/search?q=bittorrent+port+80 [google.com]

Just think if, ISP's are shaping 'p2p' traffic by port and then people use some other port for their p2p traffic, one might see a drop in 'p2p' traffic.

Re:Dissappointed. (2, Interesting)

aXis100 (690904) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271481)

ISP arent shaping by port anymore these days - usually it's some other deep inspection techniques. There's no free/easy solution, and if you think you have one, the ISP's will have a countermeasure just as quickly.

Re:Dissappointed. (1)

sgbett (739519) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271723)

Sorry I am UK so made assumptions based on that - afaik nobody (major) uses Deep packet Inspection here yet. People have been dropping [guardian.co.uk] Phorm [zdnet.co.uk] trials for the hot potato it is.

Once they do though (I see virgin still seem to be on board, which is worrying to me as cable is the only decent choice in the uk imho) then the users move to the next level (they already know how, but why bother when simple port 80 stuff works for now) ...

http://www.inputoutput.io/how-to-subvert-deep-packet-inspection-the-right-way/ [inputoutput.io]

I agree the ISP's will react in time, but my money is on the community moving faster than the ISPs. (look at how CSS, AACS and DRM in general is working out...)

I think the real answer (from ISP's) is legal downloadable media content with a compelling price. Convenience is the huge elephant in the room that media providers seem intent on ignoring. Yes, there will always be freeloaders but there are a huge swathe of people who would quite happily pay for the convenience of not having to trawl binsearch or tpb for the content they want.

There is a quite significant market in reasonably priced 'authorised' downloadable content (itunes, virgin on demand, sky box office etc) which proves the model works.

Cost of delivery vs price? The potential margin must be huge. At least comparable to that of physical media. if ISP's cache content locally they are laughing. If I was an ISP with a fat network that already had a content delivery arm (oh yes thats right Virgin) then I would set up my own 'iPlayer' knock off, I know - vPlayer.

I have a hunch that bandwidth costs (From p2p at least) would be slashed, as everyone would just get the content of your own servers.

Meh, I'm rambling now.

When they DPI your shell account too (1)

tepples (727027) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271913)

Which requires a subscription to a shell account on a remote server. What provider do you recommend? And what happens when the remote server's ISP is also deep-packet-inspecting?

I think the real answer (from ISP's) is legal downloadable media content with a compelling price.

Let me know when I can lawfully download a copy of Song of the South.

Re:Dissappointed. (2, Interesting)

freddej (122902) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271625)

Well, since the report is provided by Arbor, whom bought the DPI vendor Ellacoya some time ago, we can probably pretty safely say that changing the port doesn't matter.

Re:Dissappointed. (1)

sgbett (739519) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271745)

Assuming of course that they haven't just conveniently ignored the port jumpers, so that they can report great numbers to push their 'miraculous-p2p-traffic-reducing' software.

No drop (1)

zmooc (33175) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271375)

Bullshit. There is no drop. P2P traffic is still increasing. It's just not increasing as fast as the youtube traffic.

For me... (1)

Idiomatick (976696) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271415)

For me I may have lost a few % of P2P. Main reason being? Streaming video is so damn convenient. I really doubt that this could be attributed to any drop in 'pirating' or w/e the mafiaa is calling it these days. The pirates have just moved on from torrenting. At least for the casual users it is. For me if there is a show I know I want to watch all of then I'll torrent it (scrubs for example). But if I'm just bored and feel like something random I'll try a streaming site.
Generally speaking, anime works better streaming since you can often find next to perfect quality. Movies streaming I will only rarely bother with. I guess I will use streaming for movies rare enough that it'll look like it takes a month to torrent.

Also I think average 'light' users of 5years ago are now watching fart videos online and maybe using webcams. Maybe watching porn videos instead of just dling pictures. Pretty sure that demographic is just increasing really fucking fast.

And to top it off it is an unverified study done by a company selling these tools that they 'proved' work. Sooo, no big surprise there. Not that I want to build a strawman but either they have to get it verified by a 3rd party or release every tiny detail on their method.

Re:For me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271669)

Streaming video is so damn convenient.

Exactly. Why go through the hassle to download TV series and movies via some p2p network that bogs down your system when you can go to one of the 100s of video sites that host the same material. Sure the quality is worse but the convenience of watching it right when I want to beats almost everything.

Plus there are dozens of these one click hosters that make pirating stuff so much more convenient than using p2p. As usual the MAFIA didn't keep up with changing times. They still try to put a lid on p2p.

NetInst distros (4, Funny)

nemesisrocks (1464705) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271499)

The drop in traffic is easy to explain. Most distros nowadays have a NetInst option, where you can download a small CD to boot off, then download only the packages you need.

All that P2P traffic IS just "Linux ISOs", right?

Obvious explanation: encryption (4, Informative)

ZakMcRofl (1295807) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271549)

I can't believe that in all those comments nobody mentioned the most likely reason for those numbers:
Encryption.

Most of the P2P traffic will be Bittorrent. All popular bittorrent clients allow to use encryption and random ports to prevent traffic shaping. Encrypted torrent traffic can - to my knowledge - not be detected by the ISP and is most likely counted as normal traffic in the mentioned numbers.

Maybe encryption is not very mainstream yet but the hardcore users will always enabled it (even when their own connection is not limited) because it will result in better speeds. So every encrypted gigabyte they used to download normally affects the numbers twice: it's one less gigabyte of counted P2P traffic and one more gigabyte of counted normal traffic.

On a sitenote: this is also the solution for those affected by traffic shaping: tell you torrent client to encrypt the traffic at all times and watch your speed go up.

Re:Obvious explanation: encryption (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271945)

It's very easy to detect encrypted torrents. They still have to run TCP/IP and connect to specific ports. The only part encrypted is the payload. TCP/IP frames remain intact. While deep inspection many not indicate what the traffic is, traffic patterns do, and ISPs have plenty of that kind of data.

Re:Obvious explanation: encryption (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271947)

Protocol encryption is just obfuscation, it certainly makes it harder for ISPs but can be detected e.g. with flow analysis. The unfortunate reality is that if encryption becomes the default in all major clients (we're not far from this already?) then they will take countermeasures, if they don't interactive performance on their oversold "up to speed X" network will become terrible.

Too much of a hassle (2, Interesting)

tsa (15680) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271555)

I hardly use any download 'services' because it's just too much of a hassle for me. First you have to find the files you want. Then you have to click through a whole lot of garbage, and after much downloading and waiting and clicking you find that you have downloaded the Spanish version without subtitles. Or something equally unsatisfying. I'd rather pay for the stuff than go through all that. And I guess more and more people think like that. P2P is a victim of its (not it's!) own success. More and more garbage is put on the web, making it too hard to find the good stuff.

Re:Too much of a hassle (1)

ascendant (1116807) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271939)

I love how you think that this is a new thing.
For any and all types of P2P, especially the illegal kind, this has always been the case. And for all types of P2P, all the people that use it actually have the attention span and patience to filter out the garbage. I myself don't even notice it, it's completely natural.
It's only your fault that you can't figure out how to use the system.

Re:Too much of a hassle (1)

Nazmun (590998) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271959)

Dunno, where your goin... it typically takes me about a minute to find a good hd rip of any movie that is out on blu-ray, etc. Just look at the stats of a torrent before you download it and look more closely at what your downloading so you don't get a foreign version of it. It's really not that hard at all.

Re:Too much of a hassle (1)

Inda (580031) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271977)

You're doing it wrong. A little knowledge of the 'scene' goes a long way. A lot of knowledge means you are never disappointed after finding the files you want after less than 3 minutes searching.

more like by p2pers (1)

hyperion2010 (1587241) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271557)

Traffic shaping by ISPs? I dont think so. When you want your content you want it fast, and serious downloaders have know for years that after hours is when the bandwidth picks up.

Streaming audio and video has taken over (1)

jonwil (467024) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271631)

More people are using streaming audio and video to get their content. Hulu. YouTube. Spotify. Last.FM.

Me for example, if I want a song, instead of going to p2p, I just go to YouTube or Google and search for it. If its even remotely popular, I am sure someone has uploaded a suitable video with a suitable version of the song as the audio. Then I can use a YouTube downloader to download the video then FFMPEG to convert it to an audio file.

Great way to find stuff and less likelihood of being sued too (the RIAA seems to be more concerned about uploaders which you dont do when you access YouTube. Plus, all the stuff I download is too obscure for the RIAA to care about :P )

Re:Streaming audio and video has taken over (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271697)

If you are only downloading, many countries do not really sanction that. It's uploading that gets you into trouble, i.e. P2P.

Youtube also has the added benefit that many members of the MAFIA are actually putting their material there, so doing that is even totally legit for these instances.

Re:Streaming audio and video has taken over (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271971)

OH GOD MY EYES!

(or, in this case, my ears)

Hurry! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271705)

Someone look up the current trend in music sales!!!111

Improper Metrics (1)

RoFLKOPTr (1294290) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271709)

Can anybody tell me why they are measuring different types of Internet usage as a percentage of total Internet usage, rather than using an absolute number (say, Gbps)? Of course P2P traffic is going to increase in use at night when you look at the percentages, because P2P downloads (and uploads) are often left running overnight while people are sleeping while the rest of the Internet slows down because it requires direct human interaction. Basically, they are using real graphs conveyed from extremely misleading information to prove their wild point in an extremely sensitive ongoing political debate. Please stop validating the enemy (Comcast, Time Warner, The MAFIAA, etc)'s PR tactics by using them yourself. It is extremely counter-productive.

Internet Prime Time (4, Interesting)

mbone (558574) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271721)

I am involved with an Internet streaming site (AmericaFree.TV) and our traffic patterns follow normal Television "Prime Time" - i.e., traffic peaks at roughly 6:00 PM to Midnight in the evening. This happens in the US, Europe and Asia, and the local time zone pattern looks a lot like the "Consumer-Internet traffic" graph (# 2 in the original article [arbornetworks.com] ). (Note that all of these graphs do not start at zero traffic, but some higher value, like 50%). In our case (long format video), there appears to be relatively little streaming from at work.

If you look at Craig Labovitz's previous's post, What Europeans do at Night [arbornetworks.com] , it appears that European Internet usage drops quickly after dinner time, but I would interpret these graphs a little differently - European traffic starts dropping at 10;00 PM, while US traffic starts dropping at Midnight. This roughly matches what we see, and also European TV viewing patterns (see pages 22 and 23 of this presenation [authorstream.com] ). Of course, American TV prime time is pretty similar to Europe's. Putting all of this together, I don't think that streaming video is driving the differences seen by Labovitz.

An interesting corollary of all of this is that there is still substantial bandwidth available for P2P in the hours after midnight. Off-hours P2P use could triple and still not be more than the current day-time use.

In AU, we choose shaped plans to avoid bancrupy! (1)

ivi (126837) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271865)

Australia places very low for Internet cost-effectiveness & reach
- with only costly broadband available to many, even in larger
cities, such as Adelaide, etc.

Very FEW ISP plans offer genuinely (ie, unshaped) "unlimited"
plans, and the ones who do either charge the moon for them
(ie, if faster than 1.5 Mb/Sec) -or- they have speeds at / under
the ADSL 1 speed of 1.5 Mb/Sec - ie, too slow to share in a
larger family or modest university student house.

International students - even some from wealthy Indian families
are giving even very fast Big Pond Cable plans Thumbs Down,
because they do not "shape" after the meager 60 GB data limit
(which, by the way, counts -both- downloaded -and- uploaded
data), but "fines" or "penalizes" any use that exceeds their limit
with a whopping huge Au $ 150 / GB "excess" fee.

So, while one pays about Au $ 130 / month for the first 60 GB,
one's 61st (and any thereafter it) -each- cost an extra Au $ 150 !!!

Coincidentally...

Telstra Big Pond is mentioned in this Australian program
which explores Bankruptcy in Australia, eg, for the banc-
rupcy that followed one of its customers' running up a
not-so-large bill for Internet services:

      http://mpegmedia.abc.net.au/rn/podcast/2009/08/ats_20090831.mp3 [abc.net.au]

While I do not condone running up unpayably large bills
Internet (or other) bills, I consider the fee for "excess"
data an obsolete holdover from Testra's (perhaps known
as Telecom, then) earlier days as a undisputed monoply.

(Now - with well over 90% of Australia's telecommunica-
tions market, including Internet services - Telstra is just
the "de facto" monopoly... not a legislated one.)

I - for one - am obliged to choose a capped Internet plan
- far slower and limited in allocated - as a hedge against
the risk of forced bankruptcy, because Australia's ISP's
have adopted Telstra's still outrageous and presently
untenable "excess" fees, across its non-capped plans.

There are many more like me...

Counterexample: Here's a reason to live in Canberra
                                                                [ Australia's Moscow in 2009 ]

Remember when life seemed - by all reports - 'good'
[only] in USSR-era Moscow - ie, for those permitted
to live there?

I am sure that Canberrans - who can pay as about $20 / mon
for even "unlimited" Off-Peak hours Internet (at 2 Mb/Sec)
feel well looked-after, perhaps like those Moscovites of
days gone by...

Canberra: AUs Moscow in 2009 for Internet service! (1)

ivi (126837) | more than 4 years ago | (#29271927)

In Canberra, ACT only:

Au $20 buys: ...Unlimited data usage - ie, during off-peak hours ...Reasonable speeds: 2 Mb/Sec (down) / 256 Kb/Sec (up)

Hey, why should Aussie ISPs be permitted to limit
their markets to a particular State or Territory, eg ACT,
in the first place?!?

(FYI: The ISP is "Velicity Internet"

and the Plans is "TransACT Big Gig ADSL" )

We found it using Whirlpool.net.au's Plan Search tool,
and (later) confirmed its attributes at ISP's web site.

For anyone wanting essentially unlimited (AH) Internet
service, Canberra's the place to live...

think again... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#29271911)

Maybe ISP's just think P2P traffic throttled because the P2P-protocols are obfuscated by more and more clients.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?
or Connect with...

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>