hi Li Kai： thanks for your explanation, i am appreciated:)
dose the policy here means normal policy? and the optimized policy will refuse the peer out of the province A to get the data from the peer in the province A? 在 2010年7月12日 下午4:32，Likai <[email protected]>写道： > Hi zhuxiao： > > First I totally agree with Richard . In ISP’s network there will > be several links such as inter-operator links which are always congested, In > that situation if you reduced some kind of traffic such as P2P or ftp ,the > other traffic will fill the cap, this is very normal in real network. > > After deploying P2P cache, the outbound traffic was reduced less > than the decreased traffic without P2P cache (42.77Gbps -40Gbps)I think > this is mainly about traffic randomicity, because in the two phase of trial > we didn’t change the policy that the peers out of the province get the data > from peers in the province. And the caches we deployed in the province are > restricted to serve the peers which are in the province. > > Thanks for your attention. > > *发件人:* 朱潇 [mailto:[email protected]] > *发送时间:* 2010年7月12日 15:37 > *收件人:* Y. R. Yang > *抄送:* [email protected] > *主题:* [alto] ***SPAM*** 5.859 (5) Re: ***SPAM*** 5.952 (5) Re: I-D > ACTION:draft-lee-alto-chinatelecom-trial-00.txt > > > > thanks, Richard, i can understand the difference:）. > > > > what do u think about why the traffic generated by other applications was > increased while the P2P application traffic was decreased by deploying > alto? > > > > and after deploying P2P cache, we can see the outbound traffic was reduced > less than the decreased traffic without P2P cache. how do you understand > this point? > > > > > > +------------------------------------------+-----------------------+ > > | No |Data Item |Description |The way of | > > | | | |collection | > > +----+---------- -+------------------------+-----------------------+ > > | 1 |Outbound |Decreased 40Gbps, Collecting max average | > > | |bandwidth |about 54.47% of total outbound traffic of | > > | | |Xunlei outbound traffic |a day from the DPI | > > | | | |system | > > +----+------------+------------------------+-----------------------+ > > | |Inbound/ |outbound bandwidth |Collecting max average | > > | 2 |outbound |decreased 39.18Gbps |inbound/outbound | > > | |bandwidth |inbound bandwidth traffic of a day from | > > | | |decreased 28.3 Gbps |the snmp system | > > +----+------------+------------------------+-----------------------+ > > | 3 |Average |From 279KBps up to |Collection from Xunlei | > > | |download |294.5KBps |OAM system | > > | |speed | | | > > +----+------------+------------------------+-----------------------+ > > > > 在 2010年7月12日 下午12:56，Y. R. Yang <[email protected]>写道： > > Hi Xiao, > > My understanding is that "1" is *Xunlei* outbound traffic detected by DPI; > "2" is *total* traffic (of all application types). Due to reduction of > Xuelei traffic, an operator may have a concern that other types of > applications may take over the reduction and thus there is no reduction in > total traffic. I think it is great that the trial reports both numbers. From > the table, it seems that some other applications may have taken over some of > the 42.77Gbps reduction (42.77Gbps - 31.58Gbps), if the two max values > happen at the same instance of time. If not, it will be a bit trickier to > interpret. > > Kai and Roger: can you please confirm? > > Richard > > > > On 7/11/2010 8:45 AM, 朱潇 wrote: > > hi, likai > > > > what is the differences between the two "outbound bandwidth" described in > the data item? > > +------------------------------------------+-----------------------+ > > | No |Data Item |Description |The way of | > > | | | |collection | > > +----+---------- -+------------------------+-----------------------+ > > | 1 |Outbound |Decreased 42.77Gbps, Collecting max average | > > | |bandwidth |about 50.61% of total outbound traffic of | > > | | |Xunlei outbound |a day from the DPI | > > | | |traffic |system | > > +----+------------+------------------------+-----------------------+ > > | |Inbound/ |outbound bandwidth |Collecting max average | > > | 2 |outbound |decreased 31.58Gbps |inbound/outbound | > > | |bandwidth |inbound bandwidth traffic of a day from | > > | | |decreased 10.46Gbps |the snmp system | > > +----+------------+------------------------+-----------------------+ > > > > > > 2010/7/6 Likai <[email protected]> > > Hi all: > > We had a trial in ChinaTelecom’s real network base on ALTO and DECADE > mechanism in past 12 months. It’s my pleasure to share the trial > experience with ALTO and DECADE working group. We invite you for a > discussion about the draft. > > We propose this draft to be a BCP document of ALTO if ALTO will do some > re-charter. If there is any problem please let me know. > > You can find the trial draft here: > http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-lee-alto-chinatelecom-trial-00.txt > > Thanks for your time > > Best regards, > > Kai lee and Kaiyu Zhou, on behalf of all authors > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > alto mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > > > > > -- > Best wishes, > > Beijing University of Posts & Telecommunications (BUPT) > Zhu Xiao ( 朱潇 ) > E-mail: [email protected] > mobile:+86 134-8881-9004 > > > > _______________________________________________ > > alto mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > > > > > > -- > > Richard > > > _______________________________________________ > alto mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto > > > > > -- > Best wishes, > > Beijing University of Posts & Telecommunications (BUPT) > Zhu Xiao ( 朱潇 ) > E-mail: [email protected] > mobile:+86 134-8881-9004 > -- Best wishes, Beijing University of Posts & Telecommunications (BUPT) Zhu Xiao ( 朱潇 ) E-mail: [email protected] mobile:+86 134-8881-9004
_______________________________________________ alto mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/alto
