[bittorrent] DHT - Clarifying the spec
Tien Tuan Anh Dinh
t.t.dinh at cs.bham.ac.uk
Sun Mar 4 16:33:57 EST 2007
Isn't only Bittorrent client considered as mainline ? I dont think
many of us here using that one.
Anyways, Azureus had already followed the footstep and implemented
I believe in a generic DHT infrastructure that supports both Kademlia,
Pastry as well as others, and that would make easier to adopt any
algorithm we wish.
Alan McGovern wrote:
> The reason why is that that's what was chosen by mainline, so in order
> to be compatible with mainline we have to use kademlia. No other
> reason really.
> On 3/3/07, * Tien Tuan Anh Dinh* <t.t.dinh at cs.bham.ac.uk
> <mailto:t.t.dinh at cs.bham.ac.uk>> wrote:
> Adrian Ulrich wrote:
> > Checkout the 2nd Kademlia paper:
> > http://www.scs.stanford.edu/~dm/home/papers/maymounkov:kademlia.ps.gz
> Sorry if these have nothing to clarify the spec, but i was wondering:
> WHY using Kademlia for Bittorrent dht ?
> 1. This is one of the structured P2P systems with the least number of
> papers/analysis. Moreover, i haven't stumbled to any formal/detailed
> evaluation of this protocol yet.
> 2. Pastry offered the same functionality as it exposes DHT interface.
> Plus, Pastry has been studied in detail and its routing has very low
> latency: median of 1.7 compared to the optimal IP latency. I believed
> Pastry is one of the best DHT systems out there, and it is definitely
> not close-sourced. Tapestry is also good.
> BitTorrent mailing list
> BitTorrent at lists.ibiblio.org <mailto:BitTorrent at lists.ibiblio.org>
More information about the BitTorrent