[bittorrent] Getright HTTP/FTP Seeding proposal

Harold Feit dwknight at depthstrike.com
Mon Jan 30 11:11:08 EST 2006


I must say that all things considered, the BitTornado proposal for HTTP
based seeding is more complete than the GetRight proposal.

There is no explicit mechanism in the GetRight proposal for handling of
multi-file torrents, nor is there an explicit mechanism for server-side
access control.

I personally have been working on my own proposal which is grossly
incomplete right now, but still up at
http://wiki.depthstrike.com/index.php/P2P:Protocol:Specifications:HTTPSourcing
has mechanisms in place for dealing with abuse scenarios.

If I were to rate the GetRight and BitTornado proposals on a scale of 1
to 10 for completeness the scores would be:
BitTornado Webseed: 8.6
GetRight URL List: 6.5

If I were a client developer and had to choose only one, I would
implement the BitTornado Webseed rather than GetRight's proposal.

Andrew Greig wrote:
> Hello all,
>
> Today I stumbled upon a new proposal for HTTP/FTP seeding to Bittorrent 
> clients (http://www.getright.com/seedtorrent.html), which appears to be 
> implemented in GetRight and beta versions of Azureus.  It seems a fair 
> bit simpler than the previous proposal 
> (http://www.bittornado.com/docs/webseed-spec.txt) as the HTTP server 
> doesn't need to do or run anything special, on the other hand a greater 
> load may be caused on the server by many small requests, although a 
> method of minimising this is presented.
>
> I'm curious what those here think of this proposal, its advantages or 
> otherwise compared to the previous webseed proposal, and the usefulness 
> of HTTP seeding in general.  How many of you client authors would 
> implement support for such a method?
>
> Cheers,
> Andrew Greig
> _______________________________________________
> BitTorrent mailing list
> BitTorrent at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/bittorrent
>
>
>   





More information about the BitTorrent mailing list