> For question 1, it sounds like Jarret's implementation is a fairly > additive and modular one. It sounds like Bittorrent is just another > way to get the file and not a total replacement for ftp/http/file > based retrieval. This way, the owner of the reference server can > decide if a file warrants using bittorrent or not. For example: new > version of something big like OpenOfficeorg should be distributed via > torrent. New version of "cat", distribute as an RPM direct download. > I've also joined the bittorrent list so that I can broach this subject > there and hopefully ask about the "overly popular file' problem. The reason torrents work is b/c people leave their downloaders running. People implicitly do not want to leave their downloader running in this case. They want to udpate and get along with life. > 3 Doesn't seem like a terrible issue to me. AFAICT Bittorrent has yet > to have a security problem identified in three years of the project > running - not a bad record. I'm not as sure of Yum's history, but I > imagine it is good as well. Clearly an audit of the two trees is a > good idea - fortunately this is a rather active group! Bittorrent hasn't had any security problems but bittorrent should not ever run as root. Yum has no choice but to run as root. -sv
