> > To me, I am not clear what the relationship between Peer > protocol level and DHT level from the RELOAD-3 architecture > figure. Could you give me more information on this? thank you. > > Hmm.. Not sure what to say here. Maybe if you told me what you're > not clear on I could try to explain more. >
Ok, Let me clarify it. In order to make the DHT algorithms a independent piece of the implementation, we should have a clear call interface to them. RELOAD-3 has done great work in that regard, I think. My concern is: Conventional DHT algorithms only use the routing table to make routing decisions and because NAT is not considered in most algorithms, the destination peer often send the response directly to source peer by using the semi-recusive routing mode( in P2PSIP term). But due to NAT existence, destination list tries to reuse the reverse connection which the request has traversed to improve the performance, but DHT could not find the reverse connection in the routing table and instead should lookup in a new state, connection table (if my understanding is right) or using a new method to check its routing table to see whether the peer ID is really his neighbor. In that case, I think it introduces the flexible routing decision which is other than conventional routing method used in DHT. So my question is: where will the function finding the reverse connection be realized? If it is implementated in the DHT level, it will break the independence of the the DHT algorithm. If implementated in the Routing and Replication logic, it will introduce a new location to do the routing decision? Look forward to your response. Thanks! Regards! JiangXingFeng _______________________________________________ P2PSIP mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip
