undefined | Better HN

0 pointsbullen4y ago0 comments

It might seem like it at first, but P2P always needs a peer finder, and that should be HTTP. I predict that in a relatively short timespan everyone will host a HTTP server on their port 80 atleast those that can get an external IPv4 address before the cost starts surging.

The point is: port 80 is and should be open. When you do other ports and protocols you never know what the IPS/router/firewall/OS is going to block.

But if IPv6 ever reaches inertial mass you are right!

Edit: As far as IPFS is concerned we allready have bittorrent and that uses HTTP so their point is moot, I'm driving another tangent though:

Everything that can be HTTP, should be HTTP; and to proove it I made the most scalable multiplayer protocol: http://fuse.rupy.se/about.html

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

detaro4y ago· 1 in thread

Expecting a server on an external port is already quite limited, plenty users that can't do that for various reasons.

Bittorrent also doesn't use HTTP for the P2P parts.

bullenOP4y ago

Sure, and that is the real battle, who can get an external IP!

Yep, I'm ok with the P2P stuff to be over UDP, but if you ever made UDP hole-punching work you will realize it's not necessarily the most straight forward solution.

P2P does not scale for all problems, while distributed client/server does!

The bottleneck never was network bandwidth (binary vs. text), it's been atomic parallelism since multi-core processors peaked in concurrent RAM bandwidth 2014+ after DDR4 increased latency.

Copying files is not a problem because you can always make files smaller by reducing quality!

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse