as anyone looked into using Red Swoosh for the ORG?

Minion · Post by **Minion** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 12:23 am

err, scratch that part about NO bandwidth saved. for a moment i forgot that bit orrent can download from multiple hosts.

still sounds asinine to me though

Willen · Post by **Willen** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 6:24 am

For the benefit to happen, and I assume this is how these systems work to achieve the bandwidth savings, you need to have seeders, like any torrent-based system. The difference here is that the initial downloads are from the local server, primarily or exclusively at first. Then as seeders become available, the downloading switches from local direct to torrents (for a file to enjoy full bandwidth savings, full torrent-only mode would have to be achieved--no local downloading). As the file becomes less popular and more people stop seeding them, the system switches back to a direct download system (at least in part) once download speeds get to the point of being too slow. The newer and older, less popular videos will still be using (mostly) local bandwidth, but the most popular, highly seeded files will not.

I'm not sure how much of a bandwidth savings this will achieve for the .org, since I believe a significant chunk of the transfers involved are for these older, less popular videos that will not hit that magic torrent-only state, or even come close.

BasharOfTheAges · Post by **BasharOfTheAges** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 9:35 am

well... right now local is the primary host for anything local hosts 100% of the time (by definition). If anyone seeds anything it becomes < 100%. No transfer would have to be made to full-torrenting mode. Local would be the primary seeder for every video. If anyone was decent enough to help out and seed, then the amount of bandwidth used from local would decrease.

Gepetto · Post by **Gepetto** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 9:39 am

Another problem is that seeders would have to keep a .torrent file (or whatever hash file this system uses) for each video they have. I doubt everyone will start going around the .org to download the torrents for the AMVs they already have. Or does this work with a shared folder system? In that case, changing the filename of the AMV (which I, at least, tend to do) would make it appear as a different file, wouldn't it?

IMO this would just make things more confusing for the thick of the community.

BasharOfTheAges · Post by **BasharOfTheAges** » Thu Nov 09, 2006 2:47 pm

Gepetto wrote:Another problem is that seeders would have to keep a .torrent file (or whatever hash file this system uses) for each video they have. I doubt everyone will start going around the .org to download the torrents for the AMVs they already have. Or does this work with a shared folder system? In that case, changing the filename of the AMV (which I, at least, tend to do) would make it appear as a different file, wouldn't it?

IMO this would just make things more confusing for the thick of the community.

Hash info should provide correct identification of the files.

The real question is on how to construct a "pack" torrent for a decent number of files that is represented by a single file and does not require each to be downloaded - i.e. you seed whatever you have. I know uTorrent works with such interfaces, but has (for me in the past) produced complete values under 100% and some people may get put off by this.

Such large packs produce problems in that they would result in way too much slowdown of connection speeds if not configured properly (packet flooding from x thousands of connection attempts).