| [AB] ISP p2p parallel processing and isp database recompiling I been wondering if ever that isp are going to use p2p parallel processing on their networks to customers and also an idea i thought could be used for compression but could work for isp too. Its to transfer a large amount of a data signature in a small key file which the client then recognizes that file from an update server which also updates the clients database and uses a client database of the sent request info from the uploader to recompile the smaller key file from the concurrently updated database into the original file.
So maybe you want to send 50 gigs of data on a slow upload like to a website service. Then you could have a modem convert that file into a 10 KB file or so and then the client database already has the 50 gigs of data info patterns stored into a simple way and has already sent updated patterns to the update server and then once that 10 KB transfers to the website service it can use cloud I guess to recompile the orginal 50 gigs as it will be updating concurrently to the database update server and downloading updating.
How long would it take to recompile 50 gigs, I heard from some smart people this would be real good to have. |
|
ilianame
join:2002-06-05
Burnaby, BC
kudos:1 Reviews:
 ·Shaw
| Re: [AB] ISP p2p parallel processing and isp database recompilin Right... Shaw's gonna have p2p caching, because having pirated content transferred through their network is not enough, now you'd like them to cache it for you on their servers?
Sure p2p is used for Linux distros, in fact all my p2p traffic... terabytes upon terabytes... are Linux distros.... |
|
| said by ilianame: now you'd like them to cache it for you on their servers?
That would be great!! Can you ask them to put back the newsgroups please?  |
|
|
|
ilianame
join:2002-06-05
Burnaby, BC
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Shaw
| Haha, sure, but I don't think it makes sense, since they let anybody download their VOD titles for free with no DRM...
Sarcasm disclaimer:
This post contains an elevated amount of sarcasm and is not reflective of the reality. SHAW DOES NOT HAVE FREE VOD!!! |
|
| reply to nescar
Well if you look at it on a technology point of view and not for piracy I don't support piracy, then the isp could save all their bandwidth and let the cpus do all the work, if all customers could give up 1-3% cpu times that by 3 million and pass those patterns around to each computer that needs it, Example video encoding, or blu-ray 3d playback on even gaming in hi-res ect.... and useful for people with slow computers.
The compression method could ease the clogg that seems to be talked about. 1 second to transfer 10kb and hopefully 5 or less minutes to compile it or upload 50 gigs at 1 MB/s and takes 8 or so hours, plus the fact that you will not use as much bandwidth.
If some isp used this method then there would not be any network congestion, right? |
|
ilianame
join:2002-06-05
Burnaby, BC
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Shaw
| I think you are tripping on your own hypothesis:
Video encoding would generate uniquely different data - same job processed twice would generate two completely different files as far as bit allocation - so spreading CPU load across the network would not work the way you describe it - all data would have to be retransferred (That was your second idea)
(First idea) There's already an implementation of this called Content Distribution Networks (CDNs). YouTube is a prime example - when you connect to YouTube, you do not actually connect to their main server - rather you are connecting to the closest (geographically) server which reports to have the content you are requesting to be available. Hence the data travels shorter distance and cuts down network congestion.
The problem with such approach is that it adds another layer(s) of datacenter operations, with staff, monitoring, failures e.t.c. same as you'd already have in your main datacenter. CDN's work, and are widely used - but it is not the most eloquent solution, as opposed to:
Having every Internet respondent connected via fiber and being limited only by the local-side hardware. In this case distributed processing would work really well, and there would be no need for CDNs... |
|
Reviews:
·Shaw
4 edits | reply to ilianame
said by ilianame:Right... Shaw's gonna have p2p caching, because having pirated content transferred through their network is not enough, now you'd like them to cache it for you on their servers?
Sure p2p is used for Linux distros, in fact all my p2p traffic... terabytes upon terabytes... are Linux distros....
And there's not a single game vendor using torrent based game updates? Diablo III among many others use it. Let alone the fact users like me actually use the torrent protocol to seed privately recorded videos from various hosts at the same so that we can all chip in and have our viewers get semi-decent download speed rather than pay some mega company to host it for us on an over saturated server and deal with the fact they can be pressured by their host to remove our content due to their political backing / support like youtube.
If it works for Blizzard, arguably the most profitable game developer in the past decade, whats illegal about using it ourselves, why should it be limited or biased against at all?
The limiting of a peer to peer based transfer protocol on a residential package is really ironic, since the business package customer will be using different protocols and mainly VPN for remote connection what the heck does shaw expect residential customers to be using... P2P of course. 1up for shaw and -1 for the ignorant subscriber i suppose.
Really its irrelevant because any knowledgeable user that knows how to VPN /encrypt proxy can bypass it on the shaw network, thus it only punishes the ignorant masses that pay their bill without asking any questions all the while the major offenders are unaffected.
Why demonize such a useful transport protocol for everyone based on the illegal uses of a few. FTP was used for many 0-day sites many years back and still is.. any demonization of this protocol or ISP throttling? Perhaps its time to ban HTML too since some people choose to develop questionable websites with it.
Par for the course sadly, if the torrent app icon was a man with a scary hat and a beard the whole protocol would no doubt be banned by now and fear mongered into the bowls of history, sad how the mainstream media can brainwash us to think anything that suits them. One person says something is bad and the rest of the ignoramus's jump aboard, again... par for the course. |
|
ilianame
join:2002-06-05
Burnaby, BC
kudos:1 Reviews:
·Shaw
| Must.. smoke.. less.. crack..
and.. read.. more... thread...
And in case you're not just on crack,
my ideal resolution, and the sole reason I would not want to see p2p caching,
is to provide users with more potential bandwidth, then one would know what to do with...
I don't demonize BitTorrent of FTP... gah w/e... nice rant pal,
but you're barking at the wrong tree here
|
|
Reviews:
·Shaw
4 edits | said by ilianame  I don't demonize BitTorrent of FTP... gah w/e... nice rant pal[/BQUOTE :Nobody ever implied you were representing Shaw or their brainless policy... unless you agree with their throttling policy based on stereotyping of protocol usage, regardless your personal attacks bear no weight on the issue.
You did however imply that P2P users are claiming to download only "linux distros" to legitimize their traffic use, as though that is the only possible legal use.
said by ilianame:Sure p2p is used for Linux distros, in fact all my p2p traffic... terabytes upon terabytes... are Linux distros....
This does not need to be the case, they can actually be using the protocol for other things than transferring illegal software, just as Blizzard does since its the cheapest and most cost effective manner. Though it might have been a sarcastic joke to you, this is EXACTLY the bias Shaw uses when they implement their bandwidth throttling policy. |
|
| reply to nescar
I don't think the idea I am trying to pass along is me tripping, I am actually an inventor for my own company Zebrita Technologies and I have thought of alot of good ideas. Ideas are passed along to one another and for them to work is to talk about them.
p2p caching is to have popular software stored closer to the client like at the isp center. Info here: »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P2P_caching
I am not talking about just popular software, but it as a whole and I guess an isp could get sued if they stored pirated software on their servers with p2p caching so thats not the idea I am trying to make even before.
One of the main points of this thread to talk about is that an isp could reduce congestion with a good idea of update compresion processing compiling. With a fibre connection I am sure there will be neighborhood node congestion or something but the sooner the upload file gets to the end user then that person is offline for the most part. Database updating for compression and p2p processing should be a minute amount of bandwidth data usage.
Its almost like a free lunch, sounds real good to me. |
|
ErikRP
join:2004-11-06
Winnipeg, MB Reviews:
·Shaw
| I have no argument with your concept of discussing ideas to develop additional energy around those ideas, however in this case it's a non-starter. ISPs want to get out of the hosting business, especially anything that resembles P2P or storing user files, since this opens the ISP to all sorts of legal ramifications. Shaw's lawyers would slap anyone twice for even thinking of introducing this idea.
What sort of content do you imagine Shaw hosting for download? No to any content they provide via cable. No to any content they provide via VOD. "Popular software"? Like maybe the latest web Firefox, IE, Chrome browsers? I don't see that as viable since the onus is on Shaw to stay on top of the latest versions, ensure they are not tampered with, etc.
I'm looking at this rather simplistically and I can see all sorts of challenges. I'm sure technically it could work but from a legal perspective alone I don't see Shaw or any other ISP giving this any consideration. |
|
| reply to nescar
I think there is a misconception that shaw would need to store and hold pirated content.
I am talking not about shaw storing any pirated content but to have a means of a faster internet speed with actual less speed and making a persons computer faster.
The only processing shaw would have to do is keep each customers database updated. There no viable risk because the databases and updates and customer to customer processing would not have any visable data of pirated content. Its a process not a storage array. I am not sure if I was clear enough.
Anyways it don't matter to much, seems like everyone is so fighty about piracy and what not, its alsmot a waste of time trying to have a intellectual disscusion.
Thanks for all the input fellas, you sure point out that my idea would be loved by the pirate community. |
|
ilianame
join:2002-06-05
Burnaby, BC
kudos:1 | Sorry my man, but your idea is alike building a chain of bucket passers from the well to the village in Africa,
while I would like to see a 5 foot water-main in form of fiber to premises. |
|
