[BitTorrent] Back to Merkle Hash Trees...

Your Local Negotiator negotiator75 at yahoo.com
Thu Feb 17 14:11:49 EST 2005


hey, what the fuck?


--- Elliott Mitchell <ehem at m5p.com> wrote:

> >From: Olaf van der Spek <OvdSpek at LIACS.NL>
> > Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> > >>From: Olaf van der Spek <OvdSpek at LIACS.NL>
> > >>Elliott Mitchell wrote:
> 
> > > one hash at a time you've generated thousands of
> extra protocol messages.
> > > Given this you're likely to transfer blocks of
> hashes, at which point
> > > blocks of hashes will likely be of similar size
> to payload blocks.
> > 
> > But with a different block/field/message type.
> 
> My ideas have been otherwise, simply handling blocks
> of hashes as any
> other block of data. Pointing to payload versus
> internal nodes implicitly
> via their indicies, but otherwise identical to any
> other data. My
> thoughts have also not been constrained by thinking
> of "THEX", so I may
> of been exploring cases that didn't occur in your
> scenarios.
> 
> Having said that I think my ideas have solidified
> sufficiently that I may
> write them up in both code and spec form soon. At
> which point it will be
> time to see whose ideas get shot down.
> 
> > >>It should be clear from the protocol.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Which is another reason I dislike THEX. The type
> is a protocol issue, not
> > > a standards issue. You might settle on markers
> similar THEX, at which
> > > point you've got to try both markers to
> distinguish the types.
> > 
> > Why can't you add both the markers and something
> else?
> 
> Inefficiency. If one fails is there any reason to
> believe the other will
> survive? In Cryptography adding a constant payload
> is a big no-no, as it
> aids cryptanalysis. As lower levels (TCP) will take
> care of errors, why
> add redundancy at the application layer?
> 
> > >>If not, an internal node is 21 or 41 bytes
> (IIRC), so your 16 kbyte 
> > >>block would not be an internal node.
> > > 
> > > 
> > > And a payload block can't be of this size?
> (notably the EOF)
> > > 
> > > You're still assuming transfer of one hash at a
> time, which is worthless
> > 
> > Am I?
> 
> Time for those write-ups.
> 
> 
> -- 
> (\___(\___(\______          --=> 8-) EHM <=--       
>   ______/)___/)___/)
>  \   (    |         EHeM at gremlin.m5p.com PGP
> 8881EF59         |    )   /
>   \_  \   |  _____  -O #include <stddisclaimer.h> O-
>   _____  |   /  _/
>     \___\_|_/82 04 A1 3C C7 B1 37 2A*E3 6E 84 DA 97
> 4C 40 E6\_|_/___/
> 
> 
> 



		
__________________________________ 
Do you Yahoo!? 
The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do?
http://my.yahoo.com 


 
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