Since the days of file-sharing networks like, which allowed people to exchange songs on their computer hard drives with others on the Internet, peer-to-peer technology has been demonized in the press. The entertainment industry has pegged it as a tool for piracy. And recently, ISPs have .
But the technology, which was originally developed for the research community to share huge files over the Internet, is increasingly being used by legitimate video distribution services like the, voice over Internet Protocol service Skype, and Internet video start-up . And as more high-bandwidth applications like video make their way onto the Web, peer-to-peer, or P2P as it's commonly called, will be used even more. This means that Internet service providers and content owners will have to find ways to work with the powerful P2P technology--whether they want to or not--if they hope to survive.
"Peer-to-peer has entered the mainstream," said Cynthia Brumfield, president of the market consultancy Emerging Media Dynamics, which is publishing a report on the P2P market next week. "The technology is being used by companies large and small for legitimate commercial purposes and with good reason. It's a very efficient distribution technology. But it has to be managed, and that's what needs to be figured out. "
In an effort to come up with a solution, Verizon Communications and P2P technology provider Pando Networks joined forces last year with researchers at Yale University to figure out a way to put the file-sharing technology to better use. The companies and the university formed the P4P Working Group (P4PWG) within the Distributed Computing Industry Association (DCIA) . So far the group has signed up nine other members to the cause. These companies include other big telephone companies, such as AT&T and Telefonica, as well as big technology companies like Cisco Systems and Verisign.
Using basic subscriber information from ISPs, researchers claim to have developed a solution that can reduce a provider's P2P bandwidth consumption on their networks by about 60 percent, while also speeding up P2P downloads by nearly a third. This month, Verizon and Pando will start testing the new system on a real network in the U.S. AT&T and Spanish ISP Telefonica also plan to conduct tests.
Assessing the problem
Broadband providers, particularly cable operators, have complained that P2P traffic is eating up too much bandwidth on their networks. They say that the use of P2P, which assembles large data files like video by requesting bits of content from "peers" in the network, is crippling their networks.
And as a result, they have started to take action. Last year Comcast, the largest cable operator in the U.S., wason its network. The service provider denied it was blocking traffic and said it had slowed down the BitTorrent packets in an effort to better manage its network.
Subscribers, who didn't like this brute-force solution, became furious. Complaints
Other service providers have also taken action. AT&T says that it is
"P2P traffic is a big problem for our network" said Alex Dudley, a spokesman for Time Warner. "But more importantly it can be a nuisance for our customers, because it slows down their service. If a few customers are using an inordinate amount of bandwidth they should pay for it."
The reason that P2P is such a problem for some service providers is that they never designed their networks to allow for massive transfer of data both on the downlink, as well as, the uplink. P2P applications work by leveraging files that are distributed throughout a network.
So instead of broadband subscribers downloading a movie from a central server farm, a P2P application requests pieces of the movie from "peers" on the network who have already downloaded the same movie. This distributed model is a much more efficient and cost effective way for distributing large files than the traditional client-server model, but it requires that users have high-speed uplinks as well as high-speed downlinks.
Broadband networks today, and cable broadband networks in particular, are designed to. For example, Time Warner Cable sells a broadband service that allows downloads at up to 10 Mbps but uploads at only 512 kbps. By contrast, Verizon, which has been deploying fiber directly to customers' homes, offers a service with downloads at 15 mbps and uploads at 2 Mbps.