Just carved out the time to watch your presentation, Matthew. Awesome. Really impressive stuff -- way up at the top of my list for the most exciting things happening on the web right now. Google Wave? Please =). It's so cool most people don't realize how cool it is.
Couple of quick questions, some of which I'm sure you can predict: 1) You mentioned it being a pain to do file sharing type stuff in Flash as opposed to AIR, where the primary bottleneck is writing large chunks of data to the file system. It's unclear in those couple of slides if you're talking about what's possible in Flash versus AIR, but you seem to imply that if you keep the data chunks small, you can do swarm downloading from Flash alone, with actually writing to disk. Is that true? Is there a way to do it without dialogs popping up constantly for the user to allow file system access (not talking about the "allow p2p dialogs," but the file system access ones)? 2) It sounds like it's coming, but I just wanted to again put my vote in for opening up the specs for RTMFP. Not that I would write an implementation any time soon personally, but I really think this functionality should be a core piece of the Internet protocol suite. Congrats again - really exciting additions. -Adam On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 6:11 PM, Matthew Kaufman <matt...@matthew.at> wrote: > Lars Eggert wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On 2009-10-13, at 0:39, Matthew Kaufman wrote: > >> RTMFP is a complete transport protocol that (while operating over UDP) > >> handles fragmentation issues, varying guarantees for delivery > >> reliability (none, partial, full) and ordering (in-order, as-received... > >> even supporting in-order delivery of partially-reliable data), > >> TCP-friendly congestion management with variable responses to congestion > >> and cross-peer congestion management (so if A is receiving high-priority > >> data from B then when C sends to A it backs off more strongly if loss is > >> detected), IP address mobility support, encryption (where the entire > >> session setup plus keying is several round-trips fewer than TCP+TLS), > >> etc. Too many features to list here, essentially. > > > > is there any sort of specification publicly available? > There are feature descriptions, but no specification. Michael and I > previously designed and implemented MFP at amicima, and the Internet > Archive still has the documents for that. RTMFP is better in some ways > (like that it can't be port-scanned, and it doesn't require another > layer above it to do peer discovery and introduction), but much of the > low level (IP address mobility, congestion management, prioritization) > is very similar. (Though RTMFP also has a much more efficient > transmit-side implementation.) > > Matthew Kaufman > > _______________________________________________ > p2p-hackers mailing list > p2p-hackers@lists.zooko.com > http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers > -- Adam Fisk http://www.littleshoot.org | http://adamfisk.wordpress.com | http://twitter.com/adamfisk
_______________________________________________ p2p-hackers mailing list p2p-hackers@lists.zooko.com http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
