4 ms·
The one huge advantage of content-addressing over location-addressing (= URL with domain name and path) is that the original source isn't solely responsible for
by lgierth 9y ago
The one huge advantage of content-addressing over location-addressing (= URL with domain name and path) is that the original source isn't solely responsible for keeping the content online and the link working.
Anyone can help out by keeping a copy. With location-addressing additional copies of the content aren't just largely hidden, they also get into a weird mode of competition with the original URL. With content-addressing, additional copies instead forge stronger resilience.
- dymk 9y ago> is that the original source isn't solely responsible for keeping the content online and the link working No, the original source is still the one solely responsible, unless there's some agreement between parties to cache content for them. Anyone can help, yes, but it's not their responsibility to keep content online unless there's some agreement between the original content source and other nodes, which is of course not the case by default.
- lgierth 9y agoContent-addressing doesn't alleviate the problem 100%, since content can still fall off the network - but it improves the structure of the network in a way that makes it tremendously easier to keep content around. You don't need control over the original domain name to help in distributing a certain piece of content. My colleague Matt addressed this beautifully in a recent talk at the NSDR Symposium: https://archive.org/download/ndsr-dc-2017/04_Speaker_3_Matt_Zumwalt.mp4 https://archive.org/download/ndsr-dc-2017/04_Speaker_3_Matt_... // edited to fix URL