Comments on: konspire vs BitTorrent: The hype, and not believing it

By: Yoz

Yoz — Fri, 04 Jul 2003 20:27:05 +0000

Thanks for the comment, Leo! You’re right, that’s one of many problems with the comparison document.
What kind of p2p software are you working on?
(And I should say that my Chinese is certainly worse than your English)

By: Leo Shao

Leo Shao — Fri, 04 Jul 2003 13:41:20 +0000

Hi, I am from China.
I have read “BT vs Konspire” article too. I agree with you and feel that the author has very defensive attitude for his work.
I think the author has made a big mistake that no one has noticed. He assumed only one person download from one other person at one time. This is often not the truth, and of course carry out the result O(n). If we assume at one time 2 people can download from one person(it is so weak that in pratical often 5-6 people download from one guy). It is at once changed into O(2^n).
The speed depends on how short a block is. It explains why the figure in BT the relation of Leechers and Seeders at the begining is growing in exponential speed.
Like the following figure:
1—-+—————-+
2 1–+——+ 1–+——+
3 2 1-+-+ 1-+-+ 2 1-+-+ 1-+-+
4 3 2 1 1 2 1 1 3 2 1 1 2 1 1
5 4 3 2 2 3 2 2 4 3 2 2 3 2 2
5 4 3 3 4 3 3 5 4 3 3 4 3 3
5 4 4 5 4 4 5 4 4 5 4 4
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
We can take Konspire that a block is as long
as one file, usually as hundreds megabytes.
And one block in BT is 256K, so BT is much
much better than Konspire.
I am working at a p2p software in Chinese too, and hope to take part in your disscusion.
Please execute my poor English. 🙂

By: Lee Maguire

Lee Maguire — Thu, 12 Jun 2003 16:55:06 +0000

The concept of “channels” already exists for some BitTorrent users: some sites have RDF feeds of content, and BT users just click the link in their RSS feed reader.
I don’t imagine it’s too much of a jump to use a reader that automatically fetches links. A cron/perl/btheadless could do this with little effort I imagine.