3 ms·
Very cool. I imagine when bittorrent first starting how cool this would be to do if we had something like webtorrent Two problems: 1) WebTorrent isn't very pe
by martinald 10y ago
Very cool. I imagine when bittorrent first starting how cool this would be to do if we had something like webtorrent
Two problems:
1) WebTorrent isn't very persistent. It requires people keep the tab open and I don't think the current WebTorrent to existing torrent clients federation really solves anything interesting. Unless you've got high volumes of traffic it doesn't help much.
2) Bandwidth and storage got so cheap. S3 et al is really pricey but you can get insane deals on colo and bare mental boxes these days. Ok, you're not going to get s3 ease of use and reliability, but webtorrent is going to be way worse on both those points.
- niftich 10y agoS3 can serve over the Bittorrent protocol though. In fact, there are several viable configurations to bridge between WebTorrent, Bittorrent, and S3. For example, you can have S3 directly serve over Bittorrent and use Amazon as a tracker; or you can have the HTTP URL to S3 serve as a BEP19 webseed, which is now supported in recent WebTorrent.
- kinlan 10y ago/me runs to learn more.
- diegorbaquero 10y agoCheck this: https://medium.com/@diegorbaquero/how-to-create-a-swarm-cdn-for-free-with-webtorrent-bfa09d193f71 https://medium.com/@diegorbaquero/how-to-create-a-swarm-cdn-...
- kinlan 10y agothanks!
- icebraining 10y agoIt might make sense in situation where you can keep a quorum, ie., when the assets are common for most users (unlike the example given of the recorder) and where users are likely to keep the tab open for some time. A good example might be distribution of assets for a browser game. Colo and bare metal bandwidth might be cheap, but they require knowledge setting up a server and keeping it running, which many programmers can't do reliably.