I'm not familiar with GOSSIP/SWIM -- can you give a quick summary? > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:p2p-hackers- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chaz. > Sent: Sunday, June 17, 2007 2:30 AM > To: theory and practice of decentralized computer networks > Subject: Re: [p2p-hackers] p2p, mDNS and scaling > > David, > > I like mDNS as well but for the specific application I built I wrote > a membership module (in Python) using a GOSSIP like approach (called > 'SWIM'). It works well for thousands of peers but I would have liked to > switched to mDNS. But the concern was the scaling; and I was hoping > someone had already tried to simulate it and to tell me it did or didn't > work. > > Chaz. > > David Barrett wrote: > > I'm really fascinated by mDNS. I think it's an excellent design, and > now > > that Safari is out for Windows (with Bonjour support built in, I'm told) > > then it'll probably start to gain greater acceptance. > > > > Indeed, I think mDNS + dynamic DNS is the recipe for a really > interesting, > > completely decentralized naming system that works seamlessly both on and > off > > the internet: > > > > Users register a domain name using any of the many registrars out there. > > They transfer it to the care of any of the many dynamic DNS providers, > and > > then configure their client to use that name and update the dynamic DNS > > server whenever the client's IP address changes. Finally, the client > > listens on UDP port 53 and responds via mDNS to any request for that > domain > > name. > > > > The net result is a domain name that always resolves to that client's > IP, > > whether you do the resolution using the regular DNS system on the > internet, > > or whether you do it using mDNS over a disconnected LAN / ad-hoc > network. > > > > But more back to your question, I'm not sure mDNS is designed to or > capable > > of scaling up to that level. As far as I know (but I might be way off), > > mDNS works by broadcasting totally standard DNS requests using UDP > broadcast > > and, if anybody requests your name, you respond. This requires that > > everyone is within UDP broadcast range of each other, which typically > means > > they're on the same physical LAN or VLAN. > > > > Does anyone now if this is inaccurate? If so, it doesn't seem suited to > > scale to the level you need. > > > > -david > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:p2p-hackers- > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Chaz. > >> Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2007 6:17 AM > >> To: theory and practice of decentralized computer networks > >> Subject: [p2p-hackers] p2p, mDNS and scaling > >> > >> Right now I have a p2p application that uses a proprietary membership > >> protocol. This protocol has been shown to scale to thousands of peers. > I > >> was thinking of changing over to something like Bonjour. After a little > >> research I can't seem to find anything that indicates if Bonjour can > >> scale to thousands or tens of thousands of peers. I was wondering if > any > >> one has any experience or knows of any research on the topic. > >> > >> Thanks and regards, > >> > >> Chaz. > >> _______________________________________________ > >> p2p-hackers mailing list > >> [email protected] > >> http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers > > > > _______________________________________________ > > p2p-hackers mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers > > > > _______________________________________________ > p2p-hackers mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
_______________________________________________ p2p-hackers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
