Re: [P2Prg] CORE subgroup problem statement

[Luca Caviglione <luca.caviglione at cnit.it>]

Hi Arnaud,
some comments in-line.

Best Regards,
Luca

Il giorno 24/gen/06, alle ore 10:01, Arnaud Legout ha scritto:

> The taxonomy based on structured, unstructured, and hybrid is  
> focused on the content localization of P2P.
> However, P2P is also about efficient content delivery.

<LC>
Yes, of course.
</LC>

> In particular, it is an error to classify BitTorrent as an hybrid  
> protocol. BitTorrent does not have any content localization feature.
> You find your content on a web site. BitTorrent can be possibly  
> classified, from a content localization point of view,
> as centralized.

<LC>
I would not start a flame about "terminology" :-). However, hybrid  
protocol is something I don't like in this context. In fact, I used  
"architectural", rather than protocol. So, I think there are not  
errors in defying BitTorrent as an hybrid architecture. Actually,  
there are two architectural flavors overlapped: centralized, from "a  
content localization point of view" and p2p for the swarm.
Hybrid Protocol suggests functionalities and does not lead to a  
better understanding of "how the architecture is arranged".
</LC>

> From my point of view, a better taxonomy for P2P is:
> *Content Localization
>  -Structured
>  -Unstructured
>  -Centralized
>  -Hybrid (?)
> *Content delivery
>  -Parallel download
>  -File splitting  (swarming)
>  -Piece selection
>  -Peer selection


<LC>
In my opinion, what you suggest is somewhat misleading. I mean,  
parallel download, file-splitting, piece selection... are techniques  
for delivering a file over a network and are not strictly related  
with p2p. The only requirement is that content is replicated among  
several entities.
Then with your taxonomy, I can describe as p2p "GetRight", the FTP  
client for Windows. With GetRight you can set mirrors and  
concurrently download from different FTP servers. Ok, this is an  
exasperation of the concept, but I think that architectures must be  
separated from peculiar tricks.
</LC>


> This taxonomy must be refined, but at least, it takes into account  
> both content localization and content delivery.
> With this taxonomy, BitTorrent can now be correctly classified:
> Content Localization: centralized
> Content Delivery: Parallel download, File splitting, rarest first  
> piece selection, choke algorithm peer selection.


<LC>
I think you did not classified BitTorrent. You are only listing some  
techniques used for achieving a better efficiency on the networked  
environment.
</LC>

> Regards,
> Arnaud Legout.

Regards,
Luca

> --
> Arnaud Legout, Ph.D.
>
> INRIA Sophia Antipolis - Planète  Phone : 00.33.4.92.38.78.15
> 2004 route des lucioles - BP 93   Fax   : 00.33.4.92.38.79.78
> 06902 Sophia Antipolis CEDEX      E-mail:  
> arnaud.legout at sophia.inria.fr
> FRANCE                            Web   : http://www-sop.inria.fr/ 
> planete/Arnaud.Legout/index.html


_______________________________________________
P2prg mailing list
P2prg at irtf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2prg