BLU Discuss list archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Discuss] peer to peer software
- Subject: [Discuss] peer to peer software
- From: tmetro+blu at gmail.com (Tom Metro)
- Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2014 18:06:17 -0400
- In-reply-to: <539DB7F7.8030507@stephenadler.com>
- References: <539318A8.4030609@stephenadler.com> <539DB7F7.8030507@stephenadler.com>
Stephen Adler wrote: > I also realize that from the discussion, the internet is now broken. > The way p2p is obviously supposed to work is sending out a broadcast > udp message querying "the internet" for peers. Back in 1990, that may > have worked, but now?... no way. I don't think it worked then either. If you think about it, Internet-wide broadcast messages wouldn't scale. Pretty quickly your WAN link would be saturated with a steady background of broadcasts. The more applicable technology would be multicast, but it has scaling problems too: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multicast#IP_multicast No mechanism has yet been demonstrated that would allow the IP multicast model to scale to millions of senders and millions of multicast groups and, thus, it is not yet possible to make fully general multicast applications practical. For these reasons, and also reasons of economics, IP multicast is not, in general, used in commercial Internet backbones. > So its all about seeding peer discovery through tricks and gimmicks. > uploading an initial list of peers to an irc chat room... That's because IRC is a convenient, already existing application-layer multicast network: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multicast#Application_layer_multicast Notably the Internet Relay Chat (IRC), which is more pragmatic and scales better for large numbers of small groups. IRC implements a single spanning tree across its overlay network for all conference groups. > ...a web site, dynamic dns etc. You could publish a small list of "supernodes" via a CDN. That way you leverage existing distributed infrastructure, DNS, and anycast (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anycast). > I get this feeling that with all the firewalls spewed through the > internet, the only port one can use is 80, and everything has to be > proxyed through that port... I think that's "old school" corporate firewall. Consumer routers wouldn't offer any preferential treatment for port 80 outbound. And even in the corporate environment, using port 80 doesn't get you an inbound UDP connection. I'd be curious to know what percentage of - say the Fortune 1000 - block all outbound connections except for a few select ports. -Tom -- Tom Metro The Perl Shop, Newton, MA, USA "Predictable On-demand Perl Consulting." http://www.theperlshop.com/
- References:
- [Discuss] peer to peer software
- From: adler at stephenadler.com (Stephen Adler)
- [Discuss] peer to peer software
- From: adler at stephenadler.com (Stephen Adler)
- [Discuss] peer to peer software
- Prev by Date: [Discuss] peer to peer software
- Next by Date: [Discuss] peer to peer software
- Previous by thread: [Discuss] peer to peer software
- Next by thread: [Discuss] peer to peer software
- Index(es):