-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Apr 24, 2008, at 6:48 AM, Keith O'Neill wrote: > The iTrackers just helps the nodes to talk to each other in a more > efficient way, all the iTracker does is talk to another p2p tracker > and > is used for network topology, has no caching or file information or > user > information.. > After reading the P4P paper, it seems like the iTrackers have some large implications. Off the top of my head: - - The paper says, "An iTracker provides... network status/ topology..." doesn't it seem like you wouldn't want to send this to P2P clients? Is the "PID" supposed to preserve privacy here? I have some doubts about how well the PID helps after exposing ASN and LOC. - - As a P2P developer, wouldn't I be worried about giving the iTracker the ability to tell my clients that their upload/download capacity is 0 (or just above)? It seems like iTrackers are allowed to control P2P clients completely w/ this recommendation, right? That would be very useful for an ISP, but a very dangerous DoS vector to clients. These are just a couple of the thoughts that I had while reading. Eric > Keith O'Neill > Pando Networks > > Mike Gonnason wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 5:30 AM, Michael Holstein >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >>>> ISP's have been very clear that they regard their network maps >>>> as being proprietary for many good reasons. The approach that >>>> P4P takes is to have an intermediate server (which we call an >>>> iTracker) that processes the network maps and provides >>>> abstracted guidance (lists of IP prefixes and percentages) to >>>> the p2p networks that allows them to figure out which peers are >>>> near each other. The iTracker can be run by the ISP or by a >>>> trusted third party, as the ISP prefers. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> Won't this approach (using a ISP-managed intermediate) >>> ultimately end up >>> being co-opted by the lawyers for the various industry "interest >>> groups" >>> and thus be ignored by the p2p users? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Michael Holstein >>> Cleveland State University >>> >> >> This idea is what I am concerned about. Until the whole copyright >> mess >> gets sorted out, wouldn't these iTracker supernodes be a goldmine of >> logs for copyright lawyers? They would have a great deal of >> information about what exactly is being transferred, by whom and for >> how long. >> >> -Mike Gonnason >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NANOG mailing list >> NANOG@nanog.org >> http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog >> > > > _______________________________________________ > NANOG mailing list > NANOG@nanog.org > http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) iD4DBQFIEK5hK/tq6CJjZQIRAgXqAJd8t3XkmYqo1WYaJP7qOF4W67tYAJ9C5hZ+ iwVc8ZU8AJ3f98KCFCq8Eg== =LEPV -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ NANOG mailing list NANOG@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog
