p2p monticello - any takers?
Brian Brown
rbb at techgame.net
Mon Feb 28 16:45:19 UTC 2005
On Feb 28, 2005, at 2:58 AM, Cees de Groot wrote:
> Ramble:
> - For the user it would be better to send the retrieval request to all
> hits in parallel; for the network that wouldn't be as nice of course;
> - So maybe a two-stage protocol? Ask for a file handle, retrieve from
> the first host that responds?
>
>
Absolutely! This will be the simplest way to localize bandwidth and
resource usage for peers that need the resources at a given time. That
saves the overall network resources for the myriad of messages that
will grow as more services are available. One of things about gnutella
and other p2p networks out there, is the number of services available
hasn't changed a whole lot - they are mostly being use for file
sharing. So first we are putting MC repositories up, plus chat, then
developer events, Pair programming browsers, Modules repositories, p2p
Squeakmap, shared class /module documentation, BFAV on steroids,
etc.... as you can see, the number of messages related to the just the
services without the actual files being shipped around will grow
dramatically as the network grows, so partitioning off things that are
essentially one to one file transfers makes more sense to me.
Brian
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|