On 12/3/08 10:13 AM, Mark Tinka wrote:- > On Wednesday 03 December 2008 16:06:59 Hari Kurup wrote: > >> That would be second I think. First would be the kind of >> bandwidth two fellows on the same ISP have between >> themselves. > > The benefit of using a local seed is improved performance > through reduced latency. > > Without a local exchange point, traffic is switched through > some foreign country (take your pick). This increases the > bandwidth cost of ISP's, who's only recourse of recovery is > to pass this cost along to their customers. > > Adding in the cost of leasing last mile, as well as the > 1,200ms latency for ISP A on Luwum Street to reach ISP B on > Kampala Road, I'd rather have a 128Kbps at home with a seed > reachable over the exchange point, because any packet loss > will be quickly addressed (and not be as severely > amplified) with the reduced latency.
My scenario was looking at users A and B both on ISP X trying to share files via bit torrent. Their traffic is locally switched but each of their last miles is capped on a small pipe. Local latency between them could be more than the 1200ms depending on what else they are using their pipes for (email, browsing, etc.) So p4p as opposed to p2p is not a one size fits all solution. -- Hari _______________________________________________ LUG mailing list [email protected] http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug %LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way. ---------------------------------------
