skip to main content
10.1145/1159913.1159938acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagescommConference Proceedingsconference-collections
Article
Free Access

The impact and implications of the growth in residential user-to-user traffic

Published:11 August 2006Publication History

ABSTRACT

It has been reported worldwide that peer-to-peer traffic is taking up a significant portion of backbone networks. In particular, it is prominent in Japan because of the high penetration rate of fiber-based broadband access. In this paper, we first report aggregated traffic measurements collected over 21 months from seven ISPs covering 42% of the Japanese backbone traffic. The backbone is dominated by symmetric residential traffic which increased 37%in 2005. We further investigate residential per-customer trafficc in one of the ISPs by comparing DSL and fiber users, heavy-hitters and normal users, and geographic traffic matrices. The results reveal that a small segment of users dictate the overall behavior; 4% of heavy-hitters account for 75% of the inbound volume, and the fiber users account for 86%of the inbound volume. About 63%of the total residential volume is user-to-user traffic. The dominant applications exhibit poor locality and communicate with a wide range and number of peers. The distribution of heavy-hitters is heavy-tailed without a clear boundary between heavy-hitters and normal users, which suggests that users start playing with peer-to-peer applications, become heavy-hitters, and eventually shift from DSL to fiber. We provide conclusive empirical evidence from a large and diverse set of commercial backbone data that the emergence of new attractive applications has drastically affected traffic usage and capacity engineering requirements.

References

  1. Australian Bureau of Statistics: Internet Activity, Australia, Mar 2005. http://www.abs.gov.au/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  2. Cisco Sampled NetFlow. http://www.cisco.com/univercd/cc/td/doc/product/software/ios120/120newf%t/120limit/120s/120s11/12s_sanf.htm.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. K. Claffy, G. Polyzos, and H. Braun. Traffic characteristics of the T1 NSFNET backbone. In INFOCOM '93, pages 885--892, San Francisco, CA, Mar. 1993.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  4. A. Feldmann, A. G. Greenberg, C. Lund, N. Reingold, J. Rexford, and F. True. Deriving traffic demands for operational IP networks:methodology and experience. In SIGCOMM, pages 257--270, Stockholm, Sweden, Aug. 2000. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  5. C. Fraleigh, S. Moon, B. Lyles, C. Cotton, M. Khan, D. Moll, R. Rockell, T. Seely, and C. Diot. Packet-Level Traffic Measurements from the Sprint IP Backbone. IEEE Network 17(6):6--16, Nov. 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  6. K. Fukuda, K. Cho, and H. Esaki. The impact of residential broadband traffic on Japanese ISP backbones. SIGCOMM CCR, 35(1):15--21, Jan. 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  7. K. P. Gummadi, R. J. Dunn, S. Saroiu, S. D. Gribble, H. M. Levy, and J. Zahorjan. Measurement, modeling, and analysis of a peer-to-peer file-sharing workload. In SOSP-19, pages 314--329, Bolton Landing, NY, Oct. 2003. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  8. L. Guo, S. Chen, Z. Xiao, E. Tan, X. Ding, and X. Zhang. Measurements, analysis, and modeling of bittorrent-like systems. In IMC2005, pages 35--48, Berkeley, CA, Oct. 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Hong Kong OFTA: Statistics of Internet Traffic Volume. http://www.ofta.gov.hk/en/tele-lic/operator-licensees/opr-isp/s2.html.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. M. Izal, G. Urvoy-Keller, E. W. Biersack, P. A. Felber, A. A. Hamra, and L. Garces-Erice. Dissecting bittorrent:Five months in a torrent's lifetime. In PAM2004 (LNCS3015), pages 1--11, Antibes Juan-les-Pins, France, Apr. 2004.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Japan Internet Exchange Co., Ltd. http://www.jpix.co.jp.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  12. Multifeed JPNAP service. http://www.jpnap.net.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  13. I. Kaneko. The Technology of Winny (In Japanese). ASCII, Tokyo, Japan, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. T. Karagiannis, A. Broido, N. Brownlee, kc claffy, and M. Faloutsos. Is p2p dying or just hiding?In Globecom 2004, pages 1532--538, Dallas, TX, Dec. 2004.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  15. T. Karagiannis, P. Rodriguez, and D. Papagiannaki. Should Internet service providers fear peer-assisted content distribution?In IMC2005, pages 63--76, Berkeley, CA, Oct. 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  16. A. Klemm, C. Lindemann, M. K. Vernon, and O. P. Waldhorst. Characterizing the query behavior in peer-to-peer file sharing systems. In IMC2004, pages 55--67, Sicily, Italy, Oct. 2004. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  17. L. Lessig. The future of ideas. Random House, 2001.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  18. NSPIXP. http://nspixp.wide.ad.jp.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  19. A. M. Odlyzko. Internet traffic growth: Sources and implications. In Optical Transmission Systems and Equipment for WDM Networking II, pages 1--15, San Jose, CA, Jan. 2003.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. OECD Broadband Statistics, December 2005. http://oecd.org/sti/ict/broadband.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. T. Oetiker. RRDtool: Round Robin Database Tool. http://ee-sta~ethz.ch/~oetiker/webtools/rrdtool/.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  22. T. Oetiker. MRTG: The multi router traffic grapher. In USENIX LISA, pages 141--147, Boston, MA, Dec. 1998. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  23. V. Paxson. Growth trends in wide-area TCP connections. IEEE Network, 8(4):8--17, July 1994.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. L. Plissonneau, J.-L. Costeux, and P. Brown. Analysis of peer-to-peer traffic on ADSL. In PAM2005 (LNCS3431), pages 69--82, Boston, MA, Mar. 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  25. M. Roughan, A. Greenberg, C. Kalmanek, M. Rumsewicz, J. Yates, and Y. Zhang. Experience in measuring Internet backbone traffic variability:Models, metrics, measurements and meaning. In International Teletraffic Congress 18, 2003.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  26. S. Saroiu, P. K. Gummadi, and S. D. Gribble. A measurement study of peer-to-peer file sharing systems. In MMCN '02, pages 156--170, San Jose, CA, Jan. 2002.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. S. Sen and J. Wang. Analyzing peer-to-peer traffic across large networks. In IMW, pp. 137--150, Marseille, France, Nov. 2002. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  28. D. Stutzbach, R. Rejaie, and S. Sen. Characterizing unstructured overlay topologies in modern p2p file-share systems. In IMC2005, pages 49--62, Berkeley, CA, Oct. 2005. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  29. Statistical Outlook of the Internet in Japan (in Japanese). The Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications, 2005.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. The impact and implications of the growth in residential user-to-user traffic

    Recommendations

    Comments

    Login options

    Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

    Sign in
    • Published in

      cover image ACM Conferences
      SIGCOMM '06: Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications
      September 2006
      458 pages
      ISBN:1595933085
      DOI:10.1145/1159913
      • cover image ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review
        ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review  Volume 36, Issue 4
        Proceedings of the 2006 conference on Applications, technologies, architectures, and protocols for computer communications
        October 2006
        445 pages
        ISSN:0146-4833
        DOI:10.1145/1151659
        Issue’s Table of Contents

      Copyright © 2006 ACM

      Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

      Publisher

      Association for Computing Machinery

      New York, NY, United States

      Publication History

      • Published: 11 August 2006

      Permissions

      Request permissions about this article.

      Request Permissions

      Check for updates

      Qualifiers

      • Article

      Acceptance Rates

      Overall Acceptance Rate554of3,547submissions,16%

    PDF Format

    View or Download as a PDF file.

    PDF

    eReader

    View online with eReader.

    eReader