Subject: [RAI] Draft on P2P architectures

From: Gonzalo Camarillo <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 16:40:08 +0200

Folks,

the IAB has just submitted the following draft:

http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iab-p2p-archs-00.txt

Comments are welcome.

Thanks,

Gonzalo

---

From: "Dan Wing" <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 17:59:01 -0800

> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iab-p2p-archs-00.txt

Please add Gnutella, BitTorrent, and Skype to section 2.  I
noticed BitTorrent isn't mentioned in the document at all.
You might also mention Octoshape's don't-look-under-the-covers P2P video
streaming application,
http://arstechnica.com/web/news/2009/02/cnn-p2p-video-streaming-tech-raises-qu
estions.ars

end of Section 5.3,
     traditional SIP, which relays on a rendezvous server infrastructure.
                            ^^^^^^
                            relies

Section 6,
   we have discussed a number of
   perfectly legitimate applications that have been implemented using
   P2P.

I would drop "perfectly" from that sentence.  (Same phrase is in Section 1).
(Are there imperfectly legitimate applications?)

To your list of legitimate uses of p2p technology in Section 6, you might also
consider adding the "unofficial release" by Nine Inch Nails of 400Gb of
time-synchronized multiple-camera HD video footage from three concerts using
BitTorrent, http://forum.nin.com/bb/read.php?52,378166.  The trackers are on
nin.com's own website.

-d

---

From: Dan York <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 05:24:52 -0500

Gonzolo,

> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-iab-p2p-archs-00.txt

Overall I think this is a useful document to help people understand  
what is going on with P2P architectures.  A couple of comments:

- I'll second Dan Wing's comment that the draft should include some  
mention of Bittorrent, given the wide usage of that P2P protocol.    
Many sites have info about torrent usage - some good pointers off of  
the Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ 
BitTorrent_(protocol)  A mention (and links) would be good if for no  
other reason than to point people interested in learning more about  
P2P architectures to the wealth of info out there about torrent-based  
networks.

- In section 2, it would seem to me beneficial to provide some further  
examples of applying the P2P definition beyond simply DNS, SIP and  
P2PSIP.  I realize that the authors may be trying to constrain  
discussion to items directly handled by the IETF, but there are  
significant P2P deployments out there on the Internet (Bittorrent  
being one of them, but there are many others) that could be  
interesting to discuss in the document to help readers understand how  
the P2P definition can relate to deployed P2P systems.

- When providing guidance on whether a P2P architecture is  
appropriate, it may be useful to encourage developers to think about  
the *type* of endpoints that will most likely be part of their  
network.  I believe it was Xiao Lin in the P2PSIP mailing list who  
suggested that there were three types of endpoints to consider: fixed  
(e.g desktop computers), mobile (e.g. mobile phones) and mixed (e.g.  
laptops).  Fixed endpoints or laptops may be good candidates for  
*peers* in a P2P environment, whereas mobile handsets may not be. (But  
they could be as "clients", see next bullet.)

- The mobility discussion in the P2PSIP mailing list has highlighted  
that there may be some P2P environments where some nodes connect to  
the P2P overlay to access services but do not participate as full  
peers, perhaps because they don't have the processing capabilities or  
perhaps because they are too mobile and would create too much churn in  
the overlay with their movement.  They are simply "clients" of the P2P  
network.  It may be useful to mention this concept in this draft.

- For the security section, I know there are several Internet-Drafts  
out there that get into P2P security issues and it may be useful to  
point to those drafts from this document.  One of them that I know of  
(because I am involved with it) is for P2PSIP and is at: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-matuszewski-p2psip-security-requirements 
.  (The draft is currently being refactored to align with the newest  
main P2PSIP specification and to split some pieces out into a separate  
document, but the content there may still be of interest.)

- Also, the security section mentions does not mention (that I could  
see) that dealing with some of these security issues is precisely why  
some P2P networks will implement centralized enrollment/authentication  
servers (which were mentioned briefly back at the beginning of section  
3).  If you look at Skype, for example, they maintain tight  
centralized control over joining the P2P overlay through their  
enrollment servers. You have to have a valid Skype username and  
password in order for Skype to connect to the P2P cloud.

Again, I think a document like this is quite a useful contribution to  
the interest out there in P2P architectures and I thank the IAB for  
putting it together.

Regards,
Dan

-- 
Dan York, CISSP, Director of Emerging Communication Technology
Office of the CTO    Voxeo Corporation     [email-masked]
Phone: +1-407-455-5859  Skype: danyork  http://www.voxeo.com
Blogs: http://blogs.voxeo.com  http://www.disruptivetelephony.com

Build voice applications based on open standards.
Find out how at http://www.voxeo.com/free