skip to main content
research-article

Internet inter-domain traffic

Published: 30 August 2010 Publication History

Abstract

In this paper, we examine changes in Internet inter-domain traffic demands and interconnection policies. We analyze more than 200 Exabytes of commercial Internet traffic over a two year period through the instrumentation of 110 large and geographically diverse cable operators, international transit backbones, regional networks and content providers. Our analysis shows significant changes in inter-AS traffic patterns and an evolution of provider peering strategies. Specifically, we find the majority of inter-domain traffic by volume now flows directly between large content providers, data center / CDNs and consumer networks. We also show significant changes in Internet application usage, including a global decline of P2P and a significant rise in video traffic. We conclude with estimates of the current size of the Internet by inter-domain traffic volume and rate of annualized inter-domain traffic growth.

References

[1]
C. Huitema, Routing in the Internet (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Prentice Hall PTR, 2000.
[2]
O. Malik, "Wholesale Internet Bandwidth Prices Keep Falling." GigOM Blog, http://gigaom.com, October 2008.
[3]
NetCompetition.org, "A First-Ever Research Study: Estimating Google's U.S. Consumer Internet Usage and Cost." Unpublished white paper, 2008.
[4]
L. Dignan, "Comcast Feeling the Heat from Competition." ZDNet, http://blogs.zdnet.com, October 2007.
[5]
G. Goth, "New Internet Economics Might Not Make it to the Edge," in IEEE Internet Computing, vol. 14,1, ACM, January 2010.
[6]
Private communication with network operators., July 2009.
[7]
A. Dhamdhere and C. Dovrolis, "Ten Years in the Evolution of the Internet Ecosystem," in Proceedings of the 8th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet measurement, pp. 183--196, ACM New York, NY, USA, 2008.
[8]
J. Wu, Z. M. Mao, J. Rexford, and J. Wang, "Finding a needle in a haystack: Pinpointing significant BGP routing changes in an IP network," in Proc. Symposium on Networked Systems Design and Implementation, 2005.
[9]
R. Oliveira, D. Pei, W. Willinger, B. Zhang, and L. Zhang, "The (in)Completeness of the Observed Internet AS-level Structure," IEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking (ToN), 2010.
[10]
M. Rajab, F. Monrose, A. Terzis, and N. Provos, "Peeking Through the Cloud: DNS-Based Estimation and Its Applications," in Applied Cryptography and Network Security: 6th International Conference, ACNS 2008, New York, NY, USA, June 3--6, 2008, Proceedings, p. 21, 2008.
[11]
Global Internet Geography." Telegeography Research http://www.telegeography.com, September 2009.
[12]
Akamai, "State of the Internet," 2009.
[13]
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 Bbackbone," in IEEE Network, November 2003.
[14]
Minnesota Internet Traffic Studies (MINTS)."MINTS http://www.dtc.umn.edu/mints, July 2009.
[15]
D. Antoniades, M. Polychronakis, N. Nikiforakis, E. Markatos, and Y. Mitsos, "Monitoring three National Research Networks for Eight Weeks: Observations and Implications," in IEEE Network Operations and Management Symposium Workshops, 2008. NOMS Workshops 2008, pp. 153--156, 2008.
[16]
G. Maier, A. Feldmann, V. Paxson, and M. Allman, "On Dominant Characteristics of Residential Broadband Internet Traffic," in Proc. ACM IMC, 2009.
[17]
K. Cho, "Trends in Japanese Residential Traffic," ISOC Panel on Internet Bandwidth: Dealing with Reality, 2009.
[18]
G. Maier, A. Feldmann, V. Paxson, and M. Allman, "On Dominant Characteristics of Residential Broadband Internet Traffic," in IMC '09: Proceedings of the 9th ACM SIGCOMM conference on Internet Measurement Conference, (New York, NY, USA), ACM, 2009.
[19]
B. Norton, "Internet Service Providers and Peering." Equinix White Paper, 2001.
[20]
B. Norton, "Video Internet: The Next Wave of Massive Disruption to the US Peering Ecosystem." Equinix White Paper, September 2006.
[21]
P. Faratin, D. Clark, P. Gilmore, S. Bauer, A. Berger, and W. Lehr, "Complexity of internet interconnections: Technology, incentives and implications for policy," in The 35th Research Conference on Communication, Information and Internet Policy (TPRC), ACM, 2007.
[22]
P. Gill, M. F. Arlitt, Z. Li, and A. Mahanti, "The Flattening Internet Topology: Natural Evolution, Unsightly Barnacles or Contrived Collapse?," in Proceedings of PAM, 2008.
[23]
Cisco Systems, "Cisco Visual Networking Index -- Forecast and Methodology." A Cisco White Paper, 2008.
[24]
University of Oregon RouteViews Project." http://www.outeviews.org.
[25]
B. Choi and S. Bhattacharyya, "On the Accuracy and Overhead of Cisco Sampled Netflow," in Sigmetrics Workshop on LargeScale Network Inference (LSNI): Methods, Validation, and Applications, June 2005.
[26]
Arbor Networks, "Peakflow." Product data sheet and whitepapers, www.arbornetworks.com/peakflowsp.
[27]
P. Marshall, "Link data: Global network." Yankee Group Report http://www.yankeegroup.com, October 2009.
[28]
J. Markoff, "Internet Traffic Begins to Bypass the U.S.," New York Times, August 2008.
[29]
Wikipedia, "Tier1 Network."Wikipdeia http://en.wikipedia.org.
[30]
R. Miller, "Google-YouTube: Bad News for Limelight?." Datacenter Knowledge Blog, http://www.datacenterknowledge.com, October 2006.
[31]
CAIDA, "Internet Topology." http://www.caida.org/research/topology.
[32]
Q. Chen, H. Chang, S. J. Shenker, R. Govindan, and W. Willinger, "The Origin of Power Laws in Internet Topologies Revisited," in Proc. of IEEE Infocom, 2007.
[33]
M. Roughan, S. Sen, O. Spatscheck, and N. Duffield, "Class-of-Service Mapping for QoS: a Statistical Signature-Based Approach to IP Traffic Classification," ACM Sigcomm Internet Measurement Workshop, 2004.
[34]
Arbor Networks, "Arbor E100." Product data sheet, www.arbornetworks.com.
[35]
T. Magrino, "Xbox Live Going Dark June 16." GameSpot, http://www.gamespot.com, June 2009.
[36]
C. Labovitz, "The Great Obama Traffic Flood." Arbor Networks Blog, http://asert.arbornetworks.com/2009/01/thegreat- obama-traffic-flood/, January 2009.
[37]
C. Labovitz, "The Tiger Effect." Arbor Networks Blog, http: //asert.arbornetworks.com/2008/06/the-tiger-effect/, June 2008.
[38]
J. Pigg, "P2P: Damn This Traffic Jam." Yankee Group Report http://www.yankeegroup.com, July 2008.
[39]
J. Erman, A. Gerber, M. Hajiaghayi, D. Pei, and O. Spatscheck, "Network-aware Forward Caching," in Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on World wide web, ACM New York, NY, USA, 2009.
[40]
N. Anderson, "P2P Traffic Drops as Streaming Video Grows in Popularity." Ars Techica, http://arstechnica.com, September 2008.
[41]
J. Cheng, "Report: UK File Sharing Drops, Even Among Teens." Ars Techica, http://arstechnica.com, June 2009.
[42]
H. Xie, Y. Yang, A. Krishnamurthy, Y. Liu, and A. Silberschatz, "P4P: Provider Portal for Applications," ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review, vol. 38, no. 4, 2008.
[43]
Wikipedia, "Direct Download." http://en.wikipedia.org.
[44]
C. Adamsick, 'Warez' the Copyright Violation? Digital Copyright Infringement: Legal Loopholes and Decentralization," TechTrends, vol. 52, no. 6, pp. 10--12, 2008.
[45]
Alexa, "The top 500 Sites on the Web." http://www.alexa.com.
[46]
D. McPherson and C. Labovitz, "2009 Survey of ISP Traffic Trends." Private Survey of 25 Large ISPs and Content Providers., July 2009.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)Pricing for Efficient Traffic Exchange at IXPsIEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking10.1109/TNET.2023.333635232:3(2053-2068)Online publication date: Jun-2024
  • (2024)QUIC Hunter: Finding QUIC Deployments and Identifying Server Libraries Across the InternetPassive and Active Measurement10.1007/978-3-031-56252-5_13(273-290)Online publication date: 11-Mar-2024
  • (2023)Replication: 20 Years of Inferring Interdomain Routing PoliciesProceedings of the 2023 ACM on Internet Measurement Conference10.1145/3618257.3624799(16-29)Online publication date: 24-Oct-2023
  • Show More Cited By

Index Terms

  1. Internet inter-domain traffic

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Information & Contributors

      Information

      Published In

      cover image ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review
      ACM SIGCOMM Computer Communication Review  Volume 40, Issue 4
      SIGCOMM '10
      October 2010
      481 pages
      ISSN:0146-4833
      DOI:10.1145/1851275
      Issue’s Table of Contents
      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: 30 August 2010
      Published in SIGCOMM-CCR Volume 40, Issue 4

      Check for updates

      Author Tags

      1. architecture
      2. inter-domain traffic
      3. internet
      4. peering policies

      Qualifiers

      • Research-article

      Contributors

      Other Metrics

      Bibliometrics & Citations

      Bibliometrics

      Article Metrics

      • Downloads (Last 12 months)315
      • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)37
      Reflects downloads up to 28 Nov 2024

      Other Metrics

      Citations

      Cited By

      View all
      • (2024)Pricing for Efficient Traffic Exchange at IXPsIEEE/ACM Transactions on Networking10.1109/TNET.2023.333635232:3(2053-2068)Online publication date: Jun-2024
      • (2024)QUIC Hunter: Finding QUIC Deployments and Identifying Server Libraries Across the InternetPassive and Active Measurement10.1007/978-3-031-56252-5_13(273-290)Online publication date: 11-Mar-2024
      • (2023)Replication: 20 Years of Inferring Interdomain Routing PoliciesProceedings of the 2023 ACM on Internet Measurement Conference10.1145/3618257.3624799(16-29)Online publication date: 24-Oct-2023
      • (2023) Sublessor: A Cost-Saving Internet Transit Mechanism for Cooperative MEC Providers in Industrial Internet of Things IEEE Transactions on Industrial Informatics10.1109/TII.2022.323068919:9(9855-9866)Online publication date: Sep-2023
      • (2023)Modeling Sparse Store-and-Forward Bulk Data Transfers in Inter-Datacenter Networks With Multiple Congested LinksIEEE Transactions on Cloud Computing10.1109/TCC.2022.322597711:3(2725-2738)Online publication date: 1-Jul-2023
      • (2023) : Enriching AS-to-Organization Mappings with PeeringDBPassive and Active Measurement10.1007/978-3-031-28486-1_17(400-428)Online publication date: 21-Mar-2023
      • (2023)Port Capacity Leasing Games at Internet Exchange PointsGame Theory for Networks10.1007/978-3-031-23141-4_19(251-262)Online publication date: 8-Jan-2023
      • (2022)Improving fidelity in video streaming experimentation on testbeds with a CDNProceedings of the 2nd International Workshop on Design, Deployment, and Evaluation of Network-Assisted Video Streaming10.1145/3565476.3569097(1-7)Online publication date: 9-Dec-2022
      • (2022)When satellite is all you haveProceedings of the 22nd ACM Internet Measurement Conference10.1145/3517745.3561432(137-150)Online publication date: 25-Oct-2022
      • (2022)An Empirical View on Consolidation of the WebACM Transactions on Internet Technology10.1145/350315822:3(1-30)Online publication date: 12-Feb-2022
      • Show More Cited By

      View Options

      Login options

      View options

      PDF

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader

      Media

      Figures

      Other

      Tables

      Share

      Share

      Share this Publication link

      Share on social media