[BitTorrent] Bittorrent as a large-scale software distribution system

Harold Feit - Depthstrike.com Administrator dwknight at depthstrike.com
Fri Jun 11 18:57:50 EDT 2004


Now that you explained it that way, I still have some solutions for you.

There are some BT clients that allow for restrictions based on their IP
address (Either blocking only on the list or allowing only on the list) that
can be used to restrict what peers get your bandwidth.
You could probably use that, set with your IP block and your peer'd IP block
on your allowed list, denying all others, and still letting clients in those
IP blocks share to whoever (so you'd be helping people outside those blocks,
but not directly, peers inside your friendly networks would be, but they
would first have to get the files from your mirrors).
Your speed supplementing mirrors in the network can be added as they are
needed rather than all at once, getting speeds from and adding speeds to
everyone that would be allowed by the IP filtering lists.
I actually use something similar to add files from a multi file torrent that
I download from an alternate source such as xdcc bots, dcc f-serves, http
servers or ftp servers.
Setting up a dedicated tracker restricted to those people in those IP blocks
would be an additional option, giving all speed to people inside the
networks.

Several extensions to the BT protocol can also be used if you don't want to
set up those BT clients with IP restrictions.
The extension I'm primarily referring to here is John Hoffman's WebSeed
specification ( http://bittornado.com/docs/webseed-spec.txt ) which can be
used to turn any properly configured webserver into a seeding supplement to
a BT swarm (which should not be contacted if the swarm is self-sustaining).
  -----Original Message-----
  From: Francois Petillon [mailto:fantec at proxad.net]
  Sent: Friday, June 11, 2004 2:07 PM
  To: BitTorrent at yahoogroups.com
  Subject: Re: [BitTorrent] Bittorrent as a large-scale software
distribution system


  Harold Feit - Depthstrike.com Administrator wrote:
  > Alright, about using BT as an alternative to FTP mirroring.
  > If you mean using special clients as alternative trackers, you're
  > probably looking into something that isn't necessary. Even at 10k
  > peers, a typical business-level webserver can handle the load without
  > even flinching. Using BitTornado and its variants are how I tested the
  > transfer rates. Using Super-Seed mode from those clients during
  > initial uploading will increase the overall speed of the swarm greatly
  > since rarest pieces are sent out first, generating new seeds as early
  > as uploading 550mbyte for a 500mbyte file in my test environments.
  > A 100mbit BT seed with 10 simultaneous uploads can generate higher
  > overall transfer speeds as compared to a 100mbit FTP server with 10
  > connections (properly configured and uploading to the same initial
  > downloader base).

  I am afraid you misunderstood my mail.

  First of all, as I work for an ISP, I am looking for services to provide
  to my customers (juste like the mirrors server) and possibily to the
  community (depending on the cost) : for the ftp mirrors, I just reserve
  600 slots for local IPs, 1000 slots for networks we peer with and 400
  slots for any "others" connections (mosts users seems to select local
  servers as I have a higher number of connections on peerings than those
  on transit).

  As a ftpmaster, I feel like being able to scale to specific events is
  difficult and probably quite inefficient.

  Thus and like BT seems to be more and more commonly use as a alternative
  way to download "official" contents, I was wondering if there was
  something to do at this level. I am quite conscious BT will induce an
  overall transfer speed higher than the direct seed output transfert
  speed. But, I am quite doubtfull about the uselessness of a localserver
  to induce additionnal transfer speed. Moreover, you may rely on a
  localserver to give information about network links (BGPx would be
  useless as even if you manage to get the routing table, you can not
  differ peering/transit routes).

  Typically, I would think about secondary trackers registered for a
  specific network. These trackers would then give to local users
  information about preferred IP blocks and local disks servers to
  request data from. These disks servers could either be full mirrors
  (like ftp mirrors) or cache mirrors. But as I do not know neither if
  this would be compatible with future BT philosophy nor if people would
  be interested, I am quite interesting by comments on the subject... :-)

     François


        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
              ADVERTISEMENT





----------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
  Yahoo! Groups Links

    a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BitTorrent/

    b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    BitTorrent-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

    c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.701 / Virus Database: 458 - Release Date: 6/7/2004


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> 
Yahoo! Domains - Claim yours for only $14.70
http://us.click.yahoo.com/Z1wmxD/DREIAA/yQLSAA/dkFolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~-> 

 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
     http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BitTorrent/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
     BitTorrent-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
     http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 



More information about the BitTorrent mailing list