IP Traffic To 'Double' Every Two Years

Stony Stevenson writes "Web traffic volumes will almost double every two years from 2007 to 2012, driven by video and web 2.0 applications, according to a report from Cisco Systems. Cisco's Visual Networking Index (PDF) predicts that visual networking will account for 90 percent of the traffic coursing through the world's IP networks by 2012. The upward trend is not only driven by consumer demand for YouTube clips and IPTV, according to the report, as business use of video conferencing will grow at 35 percent CAGR over the same period." I left the apostrophes around the word "double" in the title because the linked site has them, but for the life of me I can't figure out why.

Comments

'double'

[Swizec]

How do they even define what a double of IP traffic is? Double the amount of packets? Double the amount of connections? Double the amount of IP's used in traversal from one point to another?

Re:'double'

[martyb]

Said the parent post:

How do they even define what a double of IP traffic is?

They predicted the amount of traffic in petabytes per month.

Said the original post:

I left the apostrophes around the word 'double' in the title because the linked site has them, but for the life of me I can't figure out why.

TFA contains a link to Cisco's Visual Networking Index (PDF)

Look on page 3 of that PDF, where there is "Table 1. Global IP Traffic 2006-2012".

A quick scan of the values do show a doubling of volume looking 2 years out from any given year... but there are exceptions to that. The comparison of traffic from 2010 to 2012 mostly does not show a doubling, AND, in a couple places, the data comparing 2009 to 2011 does not double, either.

Lastly, the final row of that table predicts "Total IP traffic (PB per month)":

• 2006: 4,234
• 2007: 6,577
• 2008: 10,747
• 2009: 16,296
• 2010: 24,228
• 2011: 32,983
• 2012: 43,518

Twice the volume of 2010, i.e. 24,228 would be 48,456 which is less than 43,518. So, though not quite doubled in one case listed there, to say that it would double every two years would be incorrect. And we'd be all over that if they had claimed it to be. IMHO, to say 'double' is a reasonable way to express this concept.

Re:'double'

[postbigbang]

Although I'll not argue the data, it seems a bit self-serving to make a prediction like this. There are argument offsets to this data that might be salient:

1) video, especially HDTV, is being delivered by cable systems out-of-band of the Internet because of its high data rate. This trend will continue, else cable companies will have to evolve (and rapidly) immensely fast infrastructure that must also match CPE. Unlikely to occur. However, DSL providers are faced with a similar problem. What this means is that HDTV will be switched at the head-end eventually, and not 100% available to CPE. Video on Demand will become the rule of the day, thus offsetting some of the perceived growth in Cisco's numbers

2) business video conferencing, even in the face of $4 or $8/gal costs, just hasn't taken off. Codecs are available that can do a very good job of offsetting bandwidth needs.

3) isochronous media is still a bear, but it simply needs priority and priority in the face of network neutrality calls will be difficult without increasing bandwidth and therefore asset costs, which pays/plays into Cisco's hands mightily (are you watching, Wall Street?).

4) Cellular/mobile growth will climb, but it's more linear in growth and devices that receive entertainment content that uses bandwidth are largely distributed on private, rather than the public Interent. You just can't make a mobile phone in to an HDTV no matter how much you try, and the demand for it isn't there despite the best hopes of the telcos.

5) regionalization of content distribution is already occuring, and so a distributed infrastructure will 'cellularize' a lot of transfers. Transasction-focused systems aren't well managed through regionalization, but because entertainment systems aren't usually transaction-based, the use case is largely moot.

Doubling is therefore a projection based on a lot of assumptions, mostly favoring the maker of the study.

Re:'double'

[Kingrames]

"would be 48,456 which is less than 43,518. "

want to help me with my math homework?

Re:'double'

[Bandman]

The worst part of that analogy is that the LoC is constantly growing.

For long term proposals, you'd need to do inflation-adjusted Libraries of Congress.

Duh

[kmsigel]

I really thought traffic would level off, and maybe even drop over the next several years. The Internet is a fad. I would never tell it that, but it won't last.

Re:Duh

[elrous0]

I'm still holding onto my AOL stock. Dial-up private networks are coming back! YOU'LL SEE!

I'll show all you doubters, and then Janine will take me back.

Self serving?

[stokessd]

Hmmm, a huge supplier of networking gear is saying that network will continue to grow...This article is making me want to buy a lot of networking gear to get ahead of the impending doubling. I wonder if that's the intent? Nah, couldn't be.

Sheldon

So buy buy buy more Cisco Router!!!

[o1d5ch001]

No news here... yes, Internet traffic doubles over a relatively short period of time..

The biggest challenge going forward is how we are possibly going to power all of this traffic. Electrical power costs are going to be raising 10-20% a year for the next little while. What we need to engineer is using the bandwidth more efficiently.

I never thought I would say this, but Television still beats the Internet for delivering video content. As for video conferencing, it is cheaper to video conference than to fly, but again, the telephone conference call over POTS still delivers ALOT of bandwidth very efficiently. Not that I am a fan of the Telcos, I am a fan of the POTS, its a very mature infrastructure that delivers very high value.

Dark Fiber

[argent]

Network Scientists have discovered that the majority of the bandwidth in the Internet is "dark fiber", a mysterious substance that has the same gravitational effects on backhoes as normal fiber, but does not interact with the internet as a whole. Some believe is possible to harness this bandwidth through dark packets, but others fear the growth of pink packets (typically containing porn and spam) will eliminate any potential gains from this little-understood phenomenon. Other scientists, primarily at ISPs, believe that extracting dark money from end users through traffic surcharges is the only way to take advantage of dark fiber.

Time range

[j00r0m4nc3r]

Web traffic volumes will almost double every two years from 2007 to 2012

But ONLY until Dec 31, 2011 when it will immediately stop doubling.

What's the average in centibytes per fortnight?

[davidwr]

There, got that out of the way.

Re:What's the average in centibytes per fortnight?

[kmsigel]

How many 0.08 bits every 14 days. I like it.