Search the web
Sign In
New User? Sign Up
the_gdf · The Gnutella Developer Forum (GDF)
? Already a member? Sign in to Yahoo!

Yahoo! Groups Tips

Did you know...
Real people. Real stories. See how Yahoo! Groups impacts members worldwide.

Best of Y! Groups

   Check them out and nominate your group.
Having problems with message search? Fill out this form to ensure your group is one of the first to be migrated to the new message search system.

Messages

  Messages Help
Advanced
Updated PFSP specifications   Message List  
Reply | Forward Message #23588 of 23639 |
Re: Updated PFSP specifications

Quoting Justin Chapweske <justin@...> from ml.gnutella.dev-forum:
:I doubt you really need to put something like this explicitly in a
:spec. If a client choose to advertise less available ranges to a
:certain requester, then that should be fine.

It's useful to know how much of a file each client has, even if the list of
available ranges is incomplete, and the burden of the extra header is small
enough to be worthwhile.

If it wasn't for the documentation of the extra header, I wouldn't have
mentionned it. Gtk-gnutella has been limiting the returned ranges for years!

However, I had also noticed that some clients mistakenly dealt with 4xx
errors as if they were fatal, not retrying as they should on a 416 (but
naturally changing their request to encompass one of the returned available
ranges).

Hence the need for updating the specs.

Raphael



Sun Apr 19, 2009 7:23 am

raphael_manf...
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email

Forward
Message #23588 of 23639 |
Expand Messages Author Sort by Date

I have updated the PFSP specs, cleaning up the format, fixing errors. I have also added a new feature, described in section 5, that will be implemented in...
Raphael Manfredi
raphael_manf...
Offline Send Email
Mar 31, 2009
9:10 pm

Hi Raphael, Many thanks for updating the spec! The texts overally looks good, but the extension is problematic for Phex: Phex uses the X-Available-Ranges to...
Arne Babenhauserheide
arne_bab
Offline Send Email
Apr 18, 2009
6:39 pm

... The sole motivation of this change is simply to save bandwidth when "bad" clients request a highly fragmented file without honouring the Retry-After ...
Raphael_Manfredi@...
raphael_manf...
Offline Send Email
Apr 18, 2009
7:22 pm

... Wouldn't it be better to simply ban these clients, then? Best wishes, Arne -- -- Ein Würfel System: http://1w6.org - einfach saubere (Rollenspiel-)...
Arne Babenhauserheide
arne_bab
Offline Send Email
Apr 18, 2009
10:08 pm

I doubt you really need to put something like this explicitly in a spec. If a client choose to advertise less available ranges to a certain requester, then...
Justin Chapweske
justin@...
Send Email
Apr 19, 2009
2:06 am

... It's useful to know how much of a file each client has, even if the list of available ranges is incomplete, and the burden of the extra header is small ...
Raphael_Manfredi@...
raphael_manf...
Offline Send Email
Apr 19, 2009
7:29 am

... If I did, I'd ban 95% of the clients, roughly speaking, 4 main vendors (not counting the derivatives based on the same code but branded as another vendor)....
Raphael_Manfredi@...
raphael_manf...
Offline Send Email
Apr 18, 2009
10:22 pm

... Ouch... would the fragmentation reduction help which Phex uses? One simple way (I don't know if it's the one Phex uses): Just do Worst Fit (choose a...
Arne Babenhauserheide
arne_bab
Offline Send Email
Apr 18, 2009
11:26 pm

... I just read from Gregor that he adapted Phex, so your extension doesn't create problems for our download code anymore. Sorry for the noise, and thank you...
Arne Babenhauserheide
arne_bab
Offline Send Email
Apr 22, 2009
10:07 am
Advanced

Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Guidelines - Help