4 ms·

Just thinking about it, wouldn't a distributed P2P "mesh" be a better fit for reliability probing? We could share results, see where it was inaccessible from. I

Just thinking about it, wouldn't a distributed P2P "mesh" be a better fit for reliability probing? We could share results, see where it was inaccessible from. It's kind of an oxymoron to have a centralized down detector lol

Cthulhu_ 1y ago
Sure, a p2p network of people doing distributed pings on a wide range of services sounds like a good idea. Of course, you'd need people willing to run it. A small incentive might be needed... or just a default of "if you want to use this software, you agree to also have your client ping other websites to check if they're up from your location". But it's not a new idea apparently, a quick search led to https://www.reddit.com/r/selfhosted/comments/1lv9flt/built_a_free_distributed_uptime_monitoring_tool/ https://www.reddit.com/r/selfhosted/comments/1lv9flt/built_a... / https://synthmon.io/home https://synthmon.io/home,
- 4ggr0 1y ago
  How To Build a Botnet 101
imiric 1y ago
Or—hear me out—we actually build services that leverage the native distributed infrastructure of the internet, so that we don't need down detectors. What a concept.
- eisbaw 1y ago
  100% agree. But with most used services being pushed by coorps, it will remain centralized until the "distributed mesh" becomes at least as good/robust.
  - keepamovin 1y ago
    I think this is so important and in fact with services now becoming utilities for daily life and the national/global economy, it's something that people like DARPA could get behind. We understand why a big peering corp's incentives might not align with true distributed (and hence how they may lobby for the crippling of certain useful p2p APIs from being widely 'distributed'), but it's something we should really push for and technically just do. And we'd probably find many allies doing it in the continuity of system and reliability space.

4 ms·

Just thinking about it, wouldn't a distributed P2P "mesh" be a better fit for reliability probing? We could share results, see where it was inaccessible from. I

by keepamovin 1y ago

Cthulhu_ 1y ago
Sure, a p2p network of people doing distributed pings on a wide range of services sounds like a good idea. Of course, you'd need people willing to run it. A small incentive might be needed... or just a default of "if you want to use this software, you agree to also have your client ping other websites to check if they're up from your location". But it's not a new idea apparently, a quick search led to https://www.reddit.com/r/selfhosted/comments/1lv9flt/built_a_free_distributed_uptime_monitoring_tool/ https://www.reddit.com/r/selfhosted/comments/1lv9flt/built_a... / https://synthmon.io/home https://synthmon.io/home,
- 4ggr0 1y ago
  How To Build a Botnet 101
imiric 1y ago
Or—hear me out—we actually build services that leverage the native distributed infrastructure of the internet, so that we don't need down detectors. What a concept.
- eisbaw 1y ago
  100% agree. But with most used services being pushed by coorps, it will remain centralized until the "distributed mesh" becomes at least as good/robust.
  - keepamovin 1y ago
    I think this is so important and in fact with services now becoming utilities for daily life and the national/global economy, it's something that people like DARPA could get behind. We understand why a big peering corp's incentives might not align with true distributed (and hence how they may lobby for the crippling of certain useful p2p APIs from being widely 'distributed'), but it's something we should really push for and technically just do. And we'd probably find many allies doing it in the continuity of system and reliability space.