Quote:
Originally posted by SA_Dave
So to sum up, I believe that relevant connectivity & visibility are more important factors than the number of arbitrary peers that you're connected to.
|
A good sum-up,
SA_Dave.
I also see
relevant connectivity and
relevant visibility as key concepts in tackling the decentralized scalability challenge. We can’t - and we don’t need to - be
directly connected to all 10 million peers. What we want is to be well connected to those peers that are somehow useful, interesting or important to us. The same applies to the visibility of the content. We can live with slow searches from the total content pool if we have a good direct visibility to the stuff we are really interested in and to the people sharing it.
Quote:
Originally posted by Scyth
The problem with scalability in all current decentralized file-sharing networks is that adding nodes hurts the network. Using superpeers doesn't eliminate this problem, either; it simply causes a linear reduction in the apparent network size. In order to be scalable, adding nodes must not harm a network. Moreover, there's no reason to think a solution to this problem isn't possible. Each new node on a network contributes to the network's aggregate capacity. Why shouldn't this strengthen the network, rather than harm it?
|
Another good sum-up, and I agree 100 % with your conclusions,
Scyth.
Like you say, each joining node contributes to the total capacity, to the total technical and social potential of the network. The quality and the efficiency of the connectivity infrastructure determine how much of this potential can be put into good use.
- tg
