Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
The Internet Education

Internet2 Plus P2P Equals... 289

Posted by michael from the movies-on-demand dept.
Bill, I'm lost in cyberspace... writes "News.com has an article up about a Direct Connected P2P network set up at universities which are on Internet2. This is majorly cool! More direct information is available at i2hub.com for those lucky enough to be located at a University with Internet2 access."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Internet2 Plus P2P Equals... More

Internet2 Plus P2P Equals...

Comments Filter:

  • Keep it for research... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by garcia ( 6573 ) * on Friday April 30, 2004 @11:51AM (#9019274)
    You know why "Internet2" is faster than the "commodity Internet" on college campuses? People weren't typically using "Internet2" for downloading movies and music. Just because the "Internet2" connections are less expensive, because they are funded through research grants, does not mean that students should be blowing large amounts of pointless traffic through it. The funding can get shut off just as "easily" as it came in.

    Officials at the central Internet2 project said they had no theoretical objection to the students' action, at least from the strictly technological side. The network was developed to spur innovation wherever it arises, much as users of the original academic networks developed e-mail and chat features, a representative for the project said.

    Yes, I think that P2P programs can be considered research and should even be developed on fast networks like this. I just don't think that students should take advantage of the *currently* open nature of the network just because they can.

    Don't ruin it for everyone else like *we* did back in the late 1990s just because you want free music. Instead of fighting with the RIAA by downloading their music shut them off by not listening to it at all. Please support bands that allow the free taping and distribution of their music (see link in my signature below).

    • Re:Keep it for research... (Score:4, Funny)

      by Lord_Dweomer ( 648696 ) on Friday April 30, 2004 @12:04PM (#9019458) Homepage
      "Don't ruin it for everyone else like *we* did back in the late 1990s just because you want free music. Instead of fighting with the RIAA by downloading their music shut them off by not listening to it at all. Please support bands that allow the free taping and distribution of their music"

      So I'm confused, based off this statement, do you feel it is ok, or not ok to use Internet2 for the trading of free music from bands that support free taping and distribution?

      • Re:Keep it for research... (Score:5, Insightful)

        by garcia ( 6573 ) on Friday April 30, 2004 @12:09PM (#9019523)
        I guess that is confusing...

        No, I don't think you should use Internet2 for downloading music. It should, for now, remain a research oriented network. Sadly, because of traffic being transparently routed via Internet2 to other schools on the network you wouldn't know you are doing it.

        I suppose it's just as much the fault of those that setup the network as it is of the students that are using it.
        • No, I don't think you should use Internet2 for downloading music. It should, for now, remain a research oriented network.

          This seems to imply that the two are mutually exclusive. Research into better file sharing mechanisms isn't real research?
    • Yes, I understand your concerns perfectly. And the desire to keep it academic, like in the pre and early 90s.

      But we also knows that... if and when the funding get shut off - this internet2 will be turned to commerce inevitably.

      And that was what happened in 1990s, sadly.

    • Re:Keep it for research... (Score:5, Funny)

      by Mr. Neutron ( 3115 ) on Friday April 30, 2004 @12:10PM (#9019537) Homepage Journal
      Yes, I think that P2P programs can be considered research and should even be developed on fast networks like this.

      I would like to do research on a P2P app that uses a UDP variant (I call it "PacketBlast Technology") for its underlying transport. This app would be distributed to all students and faculty at all Internet2-connected universities. This would be totally decentralized - every client would also be a "supernode" and would exchange meta-info with "PacketBlast Technology" as well.

      "PacketBlast" would build off of UDP, only with connection management and guaranteed delivery. Unlike TCP, PacketBlast initially begins connections assuming absurdly high bandwidth, then scales down the window size until the dropped-packet rate falls to around 10% - this ensures maximum utilization of the network and an overall positive experience for the end users.

      I think this would be great to test out on Internet2.

      • There is a place for precisely this thing -- though based on different technology. I can download various linux distros at 60 megabits per second. It's a bit hard to set up, but once you figure it out, it's mad fast. There's other applications as well, check it out:
        LOCI [utk.edu]

      • Re:Keep it for research... (Score:5, Informative)

        by LostCluster ( 625375 ) * on Friday April 30, 2004 @01:21PM (#9020362)
        Here's a better way to figure out how to get an abserdly fast connection rate...

        First... broadcast a request for the file (specified by a hash value, just like BitTorrent does it.) to the local subnet. If anybody hears this request and responds with an "I've got it!"... bingo. There's no need to go to the external network. This file is already locally available, so copy the file using a LAN-protocol that assumes insane speeds and little packet loss. If nobody answers, you've wasted less than a kilobyte of local bandwidth and you can move on...

        Now, send an HTTPS request for a list of the people known to be making the file available to the main tracker-server. However, there's a little trickery at this stage. Instead of just returning a flat list, the tracker-server notices the "apparent IP address" where the request came from. For those directly connected to the Internet, this is their true IP address... however, for those going through a NAT situation, this is the outwardly-visible IP address that speaks for the true client. The list is sorted by whatever server's apparent IP address most bitwise matches the requester's address. This leads to some interesting situations...
        - If there's a server with the same apparent IP address as the client IP address... this means that the content is being offered up within the local network again, just not on the same subnet. There's no reason to involve the NAT any further... we just need to introduce two computers that are behind the the same NAT/Firewall to each other. Again, a local-area transfer protocol gets pulled out.
        - Now we start getting to the level where we have to assume things. For example, it's rather safe to assume that a subnet whose IP space is one, two or three bits away from my subnet is most likely to be "somewhat local" to me. Those are the servers that get tested first for connection speed... and you keep going down the list until you have relable connections to enough servers to end up maxing-out your incoming bandwidth. At that point, you'll have your file shortly.

        An interesting point is that this will end up detecting most i2-links because there's a cluster of colleges in the 128.x.x.x IP space because those were the first 3-octet ranges handed out and the colleges who were the first in line to get those were also the ones who were first to sign up for internet2. So, just by giving preference to those servers who are within the same first-eight-bits of IP space as you, you're more likely to find a faster link...

    • *we* Didnt ruin anything (Score:5, Insightful)

      by nurb432 ( 527695 ) on Friday April 30, 2004 @12:24PM (#9019682) Homepage Journal
      It was the over commercialization of the Internet that has 'ruined' things for us.

      Not that some people are sharing music and video.

      But then again, sounded like you have an agenda to push.. so nevermind.

    • Re:Keep it for research... (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      The author [slashdot.org] of i2hub.com .. His name is Wayne Chang

      His resume is here [waynesreview.com] .. it's interesting that he lists several projects of his own here, i2hub.. napster forum manager.. Q30wnerz (a q3,jedi knight 2,etc cheating program).. lancraft.. this is a guy I'd like to hire.
    • Ummm... Just to let you know, the reason that Internet 2 is faster is that it's completely separate lines, running on a 10 gigabit backbone, with many schools having a gigabit or higher connection to it. Yes, it's used for research, but most lines are less than 10% utilized, so I don't think it's having any effect on the speeds of the network.
    • Internet2 + P2P = Internet1 ;-)

  • RIAA (Score:5, Funny)

    by scifience ( 674659 ) * <webmaster@scifience.net> on Friday April 30, 2004 @11:51AM (#9019276) Homepage
    Now the files will move so fast the RIAA won't have time to see them! It's funny, laugh!

    • even better... (Score:2, Interesting)

      by whatamidoing ( 768296 )
      I highly doubt the RIAA even has access to the internet2

    • Re:RIAA (Score:3, Funny)

      by eclectro ( 227083 )
      Now the files will move so fast the RIAA won't have time to see them!

      The good: Actually, there will be no more MP3 trading on internet2.

      The good redux: There will be no more MP3 trading on internet2, because why bother with compression when you can send the whole CD! The RIAA really can't do anything about it because they don't have an internet2 connection!

      It's funny, laugh!
      Insert laugh track here.

  • Internet2 + P2P2 = (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 30, 2004 @11:51AM (#9019278)
    RIAA2

  • Internet2 Plus P2P Equals... (Score:5, Funny)

    by manavendra ( 688020 ) on Friday April 30, 2004 @11:51AM (#9019287) Homepage Journal
    mostly a lot of spyware and adware.

  • Fun yes; Research no. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by YankeeInExile ( 577704 ) * on Friday April 30, 2004 @11:53AM (#9019304) Homepage Journal

    Clearly the development of this application falls under the purview and purpose of Internet2 - whereas the use of it probably does not.

    No matter how you want to dress it up with rhetoric, the wide-spread broadcast of other peoples' material without permission is -- under current statute -- unlawful, and leaves one liable to civil and possible criminal prosecution.

    What never ceases to amaze me is how many students think they can poke at the bears with impunity, and then come crying when they get a claw across the face.

    • Really, all i2Hub really just needs to do is post a list of mirrors of useful for-public-distribution content Linux ISOs, or game patches vendors want help in distributing... so that students realize when there is already a local-to-them mirror, and realize that I2 bandwidth is more plentiful than Internet bandwidth on a college campus. If people would just download from the most efficient location when a massive file is being distributed, and universities were willing to tolerate such legally-run mirrors s

    • Re:Fun yes; Research no. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Mr. Neutron ( 3115 ) on Friday April 30, 2004 @12:21PM (#9019653) Homepage Journal
      Clearly the development of this application falls under the purview and purpose of Internet2 - whereas the use of it probably does not. [...] the wide-spread broadcast of other peoples' material without permission is -- under current statute -- unlawful...

      Why does "use of a P2P application" equate with "copyright piracy?" That's like saying "use of an automobile" equates with "running down pedestrians." Just because the app *could* be used for nefarious purposes doesn't mean there aren't a whole lot of really cool *legal* things that can be done with it as well.

      • When will you people stop with this tired excuse? Sure, P2P can be used for legal things. But it's not "P2P" that is running on the Internet2. The i2Hub (which I have been able to connect to from the Internet1, although they noticed after a few hours and kicked me off) is Direct Connect server, which is entirely used for piracy.

        Don't give me any excuses about "well it could be used for such and such..." - I'm a university student in Canada, and we (like every other university) have a DC hub on our ResNet.

        • I'm a university student in Canada, and we (like every other university) have a DC hub on our ResNet.

          Care to inform me what a ResNet is, and why your Universit(ies) seem to take such a lax approach to illegal stuff being done over it? Going to a UK university, I have no notion of what this is, and we most certainly don't have some kind of centralised server that we can setup a DC server on.
          • I could be completely wrong, but I'm sure they're using ResNet in the same way we do.

            "ResNet" is slang for "Resident Network" aka the network that is made available for students living on campus.

            As to the answer of your other question. Maybe it's just a problem of the larger institutions. It has been my experience (having several friends who are net ops) at a local small university that they have an immediate network connection termination policy on detection of disimination of copyrighted materials.
      • Why does "use of a P2P application" equate with "copyright piracy?" That's like saying "use of an automobile" equates with "running down pedestrians." Just because the app *could* be used for nefarious purposes doesn't mean there aren't a whole lot of really cool *legal* things that can be done with it as well.

        Because most P2P applications these days are specializing in identity obsfucation, and being able to withdraw the sharing as quickly as possible.

        To warp your car analogy... it's like GM putting out

      • Why your analogy is wrong (Score:2, Interesting)

        by bonch ( 38532 )
        Why does "use of a P2P application" equate with "copyright piracy?"

        First off, because 99% of P2P usage is for piracy. To deny this is to be putting your head in the sand for your own agendas.

        That's like saying "use of an automobile" equates with "running down pedestrians."

        No, it's not. If you run down pedestrians, there is clear enforcement, and you will be arrested, prosecuted, and sent to jail.

        It's much, much more difficult to enforce piracy. Hell, the RIAA tries to sue individual downloaders an

        • P.S. (Score:2)

          by bonch ( 38532 )
          By the way, your argument that P2P apps are different from their users is the same argument Slashdotters gave when declaring that they should be suing individual downloaders and not Napster.

          Fast-forward four years, and suddenly the RIAA is a bad guy for enforcing its own copyrights and doing just what the Slashdotters said they should do.

          What really happened is that in the first case, people wanted Napster around so they could pirate freely, so suddenly they are evil for trying to bring down Napster. In
          • I will root for increased legislation against underground pirates when I see similar repeal of legislation which protects corporate pirates.

            One day, in the future, American citizens will each have a counter-receipt, or counter-EULA, which says,"By selling me this product you are giving me all rights to do whatever I please with it."

    • Re:Fun yes; Research no. (Score:2, Insightful)

      by bonch ( 38532 )
      No matter how you want to dress it up with rhetoric, the wide-spread broadcast of other peoples' material without permission is -- under current statute -- unlawful, and leaves one liable to civil and possible criminal prosecution.

      An entire mindset has risen up to justify the piracy going on, but all I have to do is point out the hypocrisy of crying foul over GPL copyright violations while at the same time championing piracy of record labels' intellectual property. Copyright law apparently only holds up
      • You're assuming that the only difference between the two situations is that one involves "our copyrights," and the other involves "their copyrights."

        But the differences are at least a bit more subtle. One difference lies in how copyrights are used by the Linux community and the RIAA. The goal of the GPL is to protect the freedom to share and alter software. The RIAA uses it to protect the revenues of its member companies. While there is nothing inherently wrong with a copyright system that protects

  • Hmm... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by SavedLinuXgeeK ( 769306 ) on Friday April 30, 2004 @11:54AM (#9019327) Homepage
    Well at my school, the majority of the people with access to Internet2 are the Graduate Students, and I have a feeling they aren't spending their time file sharing (Though I could be majorly wrong, feel free to correct me). Ive thought about the abilities of Internet2, and the greatest things I could come up with were to instantly download ISO's for Linux Distributions, or massive amounts of source Code, or to trade a huge wealth of research. Im sure I am missing alot.

    • Re:Hmm... (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Paladine97 ( 467512 )
      At my old school, Lehigh University, all terminals have access to Internet1+2. This means all the little freshman can share like mad on both pipes.

      If one of your P2P buddies happens to be on Inet2 as well, you are going to get a pleasant speed surprise.
    • There is a place for precisely this thing. I can download various linux distros at 60 megabits per second. It's a bit hard to set up, but once you figure it out, it's mad fast. It's not quite P2P, but more like bittorrent where you download from multiple main sources, but you never need to upload. There's other applications as well such as an Internet2 'vcr', check it out: LOCI [utk.edu]
    • Actually at WPI they use their Internet2 connection as an access point for their "Access Grid"

      Access Grid [accessgrid.org]

      Pretty cool stuff.

  • My campus still blocks any incoming connections to my computer, so sharing to other colleges is a moot point.

    • My campus still blocks any incoming connections to my computer, so sharing to other colleges is a moot point.
      I don't know about the i2hub software but all the popular filesharing programs such as kazaa and emule can still upload even if incoming connections to the machine are blocked, they just can't uplaod to other firewalled/NATed clients.
    • So just make an outbound connection.. All because your blocked from incoming doesn't mean you can't get incoming files, it just means that a socket can't be established from outside in. If you establish a socket to your friends computer (say FTP for example), or say, a kazaa type server/network then they will not block it, and you can download files.
      • And then all my traffic goes through our campus ISP's packet filter, reducing the speed at which I upload or download to about 1k/sec.
        • Does it do this for all traffic? (ie. FTP and websurfing are both slowed to 1k/sec?) What if you make the FTP port > 20000, that might help because normally they leave those ports unfiltered as they are for custom applications and not your typical P2P, HTML type "student" applications.

          If your getting 1k/sec you may want to just use a modem, you'll get better speeds.. Personally I would never surf at 1k/sec, that's like using a 14.4 modem...

  • Special app (Score:4, Informative)

    by Apreche ( 239272 ) on Friday April 30, 2004 @11:54AM (#9019331) Homepage Journal
    Why is there a special p2p for I2? Here at RIT we have I2 and it just works automatically. If you try to connect to an I2 computre the router does everything transparently. So whenever we connect to another college student with a p2p app I2 is used automagically.
    • Yea, til every dork on internet1 starts raping your 256KBit/sec internet1 upload limit.

      Why do you think the i2 hubs IP restrict?

      and yea, thanks for mentioning RIT btw.
    • Exactly, I2 is used 'automagically'...when you are connecting to someone else on I2. This application does nothing more than restrict users to those actually on the Internet2 backbone.

      Nothing more, nothing less.
    • The VAST majority of schools on I2 automatically route all intra-school traffic through I2, it's really the smart way to do it. So at most schools, using ANY IP-application, from an FTP client to P2P to browsing will run over I2 _IF_ there's a path to the target via I2. I've heard a few peole say 'keep it for research' but they don't understand, it's an academic-institution-only network, ALL the traffic falls under the umbrella of 'research'. The 'research' thing is just an excuse for the schools to disallo

  • This could be the solution (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    The US government, MPAA, and RIAA can have the first internet and we'll all move to the new internet 2 club. No Homers!

  • Automatic Internet2 connections (Score:3, Informative)

    by Milkyman ( 246513 ) on Friday April 30, 2004 @11:56AM (#9019345)
    During my last year of University the network was so bogged down with p2p traffic (or so they told me) that it was a nightmare trying to download any kind of large file. Suddenly it felt like I was on dialup again. The only way to get a decent speed file transfer was from someone at another Internet2 connected school. My understanding was that any connection between 2 schools that were on Internet2 would automatically use the faster other pipe.

    • My understanding was that any connection between 2 schools that were on Internet2 would automatically use the faster other pipe.

      That's how it should be.

      In .CA we have Canarie (CA*net4) [canarie.ca] which is a high speed fiber optic network for research and education. Much like the US' Internet2 which it ties to. At our workplace (biomedical reseach) we have a gigabit fiber line coming to us, our upstream provider does the BGP split. When getting stuff from universities and other researchers it screams. (I've burned
    • During my last year of University the network was so bogged down with p2p traffic (or so they told me) that it was a nightmare trying to download any kind of large file.

      Yeah...a bunch of college students who were surely "sampling" all the "free advertising" on P2P. I'm sure none of it has any effect on music sales...yet there's suddenly a connection when sales go up one time in Australia (remember that article?).

  • Rationalization 101 (Score:3, Funny)

    by LostCluster ( 625375 ) * on Friday April 30, 2004 @11:57AM (#9019371)
    From the i2hub site...
    We are all from universities, so it's obvious that this service is for educational purposes only.

    Yeah... right. And I'm sure that NCAA sporting events such as College Football and March Madness are for educational rather than commerical gain too. :)

  • chat at light speed! (Score:5, Funny)

    by jerky42 ( 264624 ) on Friday April 30, 2004 @11:57AM (#9019375)
    From the article:

    the network has drawn thousands of students from universities around the country to trade files and chat at speeds that far exceed what even ordinarily swift campus networks can provide.

    Thank God! I guess Instant Messaging on this network really is instant. No more of those 100 ms delays!

  • Congest it (Score:5, Interesting)

    by pubjames ( 468013 ) on Friday April 30, 2004 @11:59AM (#9019400)

    It would be very interesting if the students managed to completely congest "internet2". I'm serious - if they do it then it demonstrates that we would still need more bandwidth.

    • Re:Congest it (Score:5, Insightful)

      by LostCluster ( 625375 ) * on Friday April 30, 2004 @12:04PM (#9019454)
      Or just a proof that given time, bandwidth usage will fill to whatever pipe it's given no matter how fat a pipe you supply. Afterall, as our hard drives got bigger, so did the programs we were given to store on them...
      • Or just a proof that given time, bandwidth usage will fill to whatever pipe it's given no matter how fat a pipe you supply.

        There will be a limit to how much is required. In the early days of mains electricity, people were very concious of how much electricity they had available in their homes. Now we don't worry when we plug another TV in because we've generally got more than enough. Same will happen with bandwidth. It's just we're a long way from having more than enough yet.
        • People always move up (including myself) I used to download single MP3's I liked, Then I moved up to Albums. With more bandwith the natural extension is complete sets (As I Already do with ROMs). People used to DL 125+125 meg TMD movies, now they want the actual unconverted DVD-rip or telespline files
    • I'm more interested in if it's possible to /. a fat I2 pipe.
    • It would just demonstrate the greed of people who will stop at nothing to pirate absolutely everything. Seriously, congesting freaking Internet2? That would have to be a new low...

      I'm sure it will all be justified, of course. Some sort of anti-something movement that nobody really believes in.

  • Social network, not a tech one... (Score:5, Informative)

    by LostCluster ( 625375 ) * on Friday April 30, 2004 @12:00PM (#9019406)
    This is purely a social networking system rather than a technical one. If I'm on an i2-enabled conenction, and you're on an i2-enabled connection, then any direct connection between me and you over any protocol is going to route over an i2 bandwidth link rather than going out over the open Internet link between our two sites...

    Really, this is like when the Starr Report against then-president Clinton, and all sorts of ISPs who don't do content mirroring did a mirror for that document, since it was long and going to be frequenly downloaded that day. By keeping that traffic local on their own network, their outgoing Internet line was freed up for other traffic.

    Knowing who is closer to your network-wise, which isn't aways the shortest physical difference or lowest number of network hops, but the one who has the most available bandwidth on the path that leads from you to them and back, when given a choice between mirrors is always very useful.

    So, really, i2hub's goal is to just point out where useful content is on i2 rather than change any routing tables...
  • quote cut a little, but preserves original meaning. and there is too little context around to say 'it's out of context' ;)

    At the end of 2002, [we] sent 6.7 gigabytes of data across 6,821 miles [...]. That's roughly two full-length DVD-quality movies [...]. That's fast."
    [...] We are all from universities, so it's obvious that this service is for educational purposes only.

    • I am sure the RIAA will be pleased when people in general start measuring bandwidth in "DVDs per second" units of measurement.

  • Adware? (Score:5, Informative)

    by dema ( 103780 ) on Friday April 30, 2004 @12:01PM (#9019420) Homepage
    I went to the website and clicked the link for the Mac OS X software. The title on the download page reads:

    Direct Connect for Mac OS X 1.1.0
    Author:NeoModus
    Program Type:Adware

    Interesting...

  • i2hub (Score:3, Funny)

    by cpsc2005 ( 629087 ) on Friday April 30, 2004 @12:08PM (#9019514) Homepage
    I love how they have a subnet ban on all of Resnet here at Texas A&M.

    What do I care though. At least I know when the RIAA reads slashdot, it won't be anyone I know's ass on the line.

  • Watch Out (Score:5, Informative)

    by pimpinmonk ( 238443 ) on Friday April 30, 2004 @12:11PM (#9019553)
    A common misconception is that this hub is "safe" because it is on I2. This is not so. People have been sued from using i2hub. No, I will not say who, but yes, I will say it's happened.

    Filesharing is just bad. Of course I do it anyway. But if you look at your campus' bandwidth usage, some ludicrous number like 95% will be p2p traffic :-/
    • People have been sued from using i2hub. No, I will not say who, but yes, I will say it's happened.

      Why won't you say who? That's public record.

    • Re:Watch Out (Score:2, Informative)

      by cpsc2005 ( 629087 )
      Our IT department, called CIS, claims it is 'Virus' traffic that takes up the bulk of the bandwidth. I and another server on campus got shut down simply because we were sending out too much data at a time. Basically, if you sent a certain amount of packets over a certain port range (Which is totally uncontrollable, as clients normally choose any random port to connect to your 411 or port 80) you got firewalled off and stuck on a sort of LAN of your own.

      I hate those damned viruses caused by clients reques
    • Filesharing is just bad. Of course I do it anyway. But if you look at your campus' bandwidth usage, some ludicrous number like 95% will be p2p traffic :-/

      B-but they're just "sampling!" I'm sure they're all legally buying the stuff afterward...and none of it has any effect on sales! The hivemind said so...
    • HTTP is just bad. Of course I do it anyway. But if you look at your campus' bandwidth usage, some ludicrous number like 95% will be HTTP traffic :-/

      Why is it that one protocol overtaking another is bad? Should HTTP have been blocked when it overtook Gopher, and FTP?

      P2P has a lot of legitimate uses, and is replacing HTTP and FTP (not completely of course) in many different ways.

  • I2Hub isn't all that fast (Score:3, Informative)

    by ALoverOfPeace ( 586114 ) on Friday April 30, 2004 @12:15PM (#9019590)
    I've been using I2Hub for a few months and the downloads aren't that fast, at least as someone who has been spoiled by the internet connection here at RPI [rpi.edu]. Downloads from a user at another college with i2Hub are usually in the range of 30-80 kb/s. For comparison, this is about the same speed that I get from a p2p app that let's you download from multiple sources, such as eMule [emule-project.net]. If someone I know off campus, such as a friend from home, downloads a file from me via AIM, they get speeds ranging from 150-200 kb/s. However, for ease of use and individual files, as well as a better community, I2Hub is pretty good.

  • bummer (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sir_cello ( 634395 ) on Friday April 30, 2004 @12:32PM (#9019774)

    I, but probably others, realised not long ago that it's rapidly approaching the point at which the characteristics of "Internet V2 (post WWW)" can be ascertained, and certainly apart from high speed, one of them as the death of unidirectional WWW.

    The problem with HTTP is (as you see with the slashdot effect) that there is no inherent mass-distribution/replication in it. What will be the next big technology will be some sort of fluid merge between HTTP, P2P (BT, etc), FTP, to bring a real massively distributed content layer. Built into this protocol would be multicast as well (in a way, P2P is inherently multicast).

    This means that when you browse the web, your browsers transport layer is really acting as real-time P2P, and your network ISP would install seamless "content caching" (e.g. akamani style) as part of the network. Effectively, there needs to be a replacement of HTTP/TCP as a new "DTP" (distributed transport protocol).

    • Re:bummer (Score:2, Insightful)

      by InvaderXimian ( 609659 )
      Why would you need a "P2P HTTP?" There is no real good reason for this but you claim that "The Slashdot Effect" displays HTTP flaws.

      Untrue. "The Slashdot Effect" displays that a web server has little bandwidth or just a slow processor, not enough memory, and slow disks.

      What does HTTP have to do with that? If anything, fix TCP first.

  • This is isn't entirely new. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by stype ( 179072 ) on Friday April 30, 2004 @12:40PM (#9019856) Homepage
    Well, ok, the software being used is new...but I was trading legal live music over internet2 years ago. Theres a well known community called etree where people list ftp servers and listings of what they have and rules for there server. Someone came up with the idea of trying it with just internet2 users, so i2shn was born. Obviously, the amount of content was kind of small on i2shn...but I guess ftp could be described as p2p. It was still cool and I support this effort. And if people wanted to keep i2 strictly for educational use, they wouldn't allow dorm computers to automatically route through i2. When you give any student at a college the ability to use i2...of course they're going to do whatever they want with it. I checked network graphs for i2 at my school...and we probably never used more than a fraction of 1% of the total resources it provided us. Wicked cool.
  • have a Mac OS X client. It took napster forever to get a Mac client, and I don't think it ever got out of beta (if I remember correctly).
  • It was fun while it lasted. The University here is already blocking it. ;(

  • They'll get connected. (Score:3, Interesting)

    by rice_burners_suck ( 243660 ) on Friday April 30, 2004 @01:15PM (#9020282)
    You know, Internet2 might be separate from Internet1, but I think it won't be that way for long. I thought of this the first time I heard of Internet2, which was years ago.

    Think about it. All it takes is ONE host on Internet2 providing a connection to ONE host on Internet1. And it *will* happen. Just wait and see. Maybe it will happen for illegitimate reasons, but I think it will happen for very legitimate reasons. Someone will need access for some reason or another, and there you have it.

    Personally, I think that instead of building a bunch of separate networks, they should build more high-speed infrastructure for the Internet. Bigger pipes and more of them, more satellites, etc. Then, the speed will be there for just about anything, and communications within organizations can be protected with VPNs or other technologies.

    Either that, or build many "parallel" Internets, each with specific purposes (science, government, business, 1337 h4x0rz, etc.) with highly controlled firewalled connections between them for allowing legitimate traffic to go between them.

  • Multicast enabled end to end (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Danathar ( 267989 ) on Friday April 30, 2004 @05:42PM (#9023085) Journal
    Internet2 is also fully multicast enabled (up to the border router of the each institution). I've always thought it would be cool to somehow build in an option into peer to peer software to multicast software.

    I imagine something like the following....

    1. You announce the availability of a file

    2. Other peers respond saying they would like it.

    3. After pre-determined amount of time, if a threshold of users have responded that they want the file. Then send back another announcement that a multicast of the file will commence in some short time period (like 5 min).

    4. Let it rip!

    I'm sure there would be other problems to think about, like what happens if you drop packets....but it would still be cool.

    I'm on an Internet2 multicast enabled organization, and as a test I multcasted a DVD LIVE using VLC to a friend on the other side of the world. It was really cool!

Slashdot Top Deals

We are each entitled to our own opinion, but no one is entitled to his own facts. -- Patrick Moynihan

Close