>-----Original Message----- >From: yum-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:yum->bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Michael Stenner >Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2005 3:29 PM >To: Yellowdog Updater, Modified >Subject: Re: [Yum] More on BitTorrent and YUM > >First, when you start a new thread, it would be great if you could >start a thread :) Please don't reply to an old message and simply >change the subject line. Threaded mail clients will put your message >smack dab in the middle of some other thread. > >On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 03:14:01PM -0400, Bill Cox wrote: >> Integrating BitTorrent into YUM seems like a good idea to me. The >> distribution of files with BitTorrent is quite secure and robust. > >Secure, robust and ideally suited to certain tasks. I'm not yet >convinced this is one of those tasks. I assure you, we're not >dismissing the idea out of hand. We all had serious conversations >(in person, so no links to point you to) about this a while back. > >> Instead of directly integrating BT into YUM, I'd propose creating a BT >> client/server that acts like FTP. It'd simply allow users to publish >> directory trees with the server, and clients could download from the >> directory tree in BitTorrent manner, sharing file pieces among >> themselves. > >Let me see if I understand you. You're suggesting some intermediate >protocol? Some FTPOBT (FTP over BitTorrent) that would look and feel >like FTP at both ends, have some translation layer, and do bittorrent >underneath? FTP and BT are VERY different protocols and in practice >it's difficult to make one protocol look like another. > >> I'm thinking that we could create scripts for mirroring popular RPM >> sites by having a low-bandwidth server that downloads them periodically, >> and making them available as torrents. YUM would have to be modified to >> use the FTP-like utility to download packages. > >I don't understand what you mean by "FTP-like utility" well enough to >comment on that. > >> So, in summary, I suspect all we really need to integrate BT and YUM is >> build an FTP-like utility based on BT for pubishing file systems and >> downloading individual files from those file systems. >> >> Should I work on such a beast? > >If you want to pursue this, I'd encourage you to look into how >yum/urlgrabber currently do the network stuff. For example, yum >currently relies heavily on the ability to extract JUST THE HEADERS >from an rpm on the server. FTP/HTTP/File can do that, but BitTorrent >cannot. > > -Michael >-- > Michael D. Stenner mstenner@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > ECE Department, the University of Arizona 520-626-1619 > 1230 E. Speedway Blvd., Tucson, AZ 85721-0104 ECE 524G >_______________________________________________ >Yum mailing list >Yum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >https://lists.dulug.duke.edu/mailman/listinfo/yum Actually something that might make more sense if have yum able to pull down multiple packages from multiple repos at the same time. I think this is where the "BitTorrent" idea comes from. Because BitTorrent can download from multiple sources at the same time. But it only downloads a file or three. What the focus of this should be (IMHO): Your workstation has 25 updates. 10 from Extras, 10 from Updates and 5 from Dag. Extras and Updates have X number of mirrors Dag has a separate X number of mirrors Why can't I pull one extra package from Extras mirror 1, one extra package from Extra mirror 2, one Dag package from Dag Mirror 1 and so forth as long as I have the available bandwidth. The thing with BitTorrent I think that it manages it's bandwidth usage (maybe not). I know me personally thought of BT because of it's ability to spread it's downloads across mirrors. And I now understand that it BT itself is not the answer but I think that thinking along the lines of threaded downloads might benefit YUM most of all. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.dulug.duke.edu/pipermail/yum/attachments/20050629/dfd3f5e6/attachment.htm
