4 ms·

Yea, see the above comments. Bringing up individual nodes isn't an option as they would likely be overwhelmed and rate limiting traffic from all of the running

Yea, see the above comments. Bringing up individual nodes isn't an option as they would likely be overwhelmed and rate limiting traffic from all of the running instances in a P2P network would be near impossible. Bringing up an entirely new super node network, while insane, is probably their best option right now. Edit: I initially read your post as sarcastic, but I realize now it may not have been. It's definitely outside-the-box thinking and after considering their options, this certainly seems the most viable.

dennisgorelik 16y ago
HackerNews does not allow deep threads, (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2032770 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2032770) so I reply here. Why would supernode that has CPU as a bottleneck stop serving _any_ requests? Say, CPU is able to serve a thousand requests per second. If supernode receives a million requests per second, then supernode should serve first thousand requests and then ignore the rest, right?
- terryjsmith 16y ago
  Correct, it will stop serving requests (ignore the rest), but the end result is no different (in fact I imagine this is exactly what's happening). That system is dead to the world. According to Wikipedia in Q3 2009 [1] Skype has over 500 million users (Q1 2009 says 42M active at any time); any super node that is processing a thousand requests and then dies (or only processes one request a second) isn't helping anyone. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype#Usage_and_traffic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype#Usage_and_traffic
  - dennisgorelik 16y ago
    If every supernode keeps serving whatever it can (e.g. 1000 requests per second) -- then outage problem would be resolved pretty soon. But I guess overloaded supernode does not serve anything at all. My guess would be that after 1000 successfully served handshakes clients send 1000 data requests, and most of these data requests are ignored, because supernode is overloaded. End result -- almost no data is distributed. Most likely the problem is in Skype code for supernodes (almost all Skype clients are supernodes). I think we should expect Skype hotfix soon.

dennisgorelik 16y ago

HackerNews does not allow deep threads, (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2032770 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2032770) so I reply here. Why would supernode that has CPU as a bottleneck stop serving _any_ requests? Say, CPU is able to serve a thousand requests per second. If supernode receives a million requests per second, then supernode should serve first thousand requests and then ignore the rest, right?

terryjsmith 16y ago
Correct, it will stop serving requests (ignore the rest), but the end result is no different (in fact I imagine this is exactly what's happening). That system is dead to the world. According to Wikipedia in Q3 2009 [1] Skype has over 500 million users (Q1 2009 says 42M active at any time); any super node that is processing a thousand requests and then dies (or only processes one request a second) isn't helping anyone. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype#Usage_and_traffic http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype#Usage_and_traffic
- dennisgorelik 16y ago
  If every supernode keeps serving whatever it can (e.g. 1000 requests per second) -- then outage problem would be resolved pretty soon. But I guess overloaded supernode does not serve anything at all. My guess would be that after 1000 successfully served handshakes clients send 1000 data requests, and most of these data requests are ignored, because supernode is overloaded. End result -- almost no data is distributed. Most likely the problem is in Skype code for supernodes (almost all Skype clients are supernodes). I think we should expect Skype hotfix soon.