Re: [Gzz] 29th, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th (hh)

[B. Fallenstein]

address@hidden wrote:
> Quoting "B. Fallenstein" <address@hidden>:
>
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > address@hidden wrote:
> >
> > > -Started looking for information about "Gnutella++": hybrid system, where
> >
> > DHTs
> >
> > > and Gnutella-like approaches are merged. Or to be more specific: system,
> >
> > which
> >
> > > has efficient routing algorithm (comparable to DHTs), and in which users
> >
> > are
> >
> > > able to host resources locally (instead of mapping resources away from
> >
> > local
> >
> > > computer into the virtual address space)
> >
> > I don't understand this. What do you mean by 'mapping resources away 
> > from local computer into the virtual address space', and how can it be 
> > avoided?
>
>
> This was what I meant:
>
> There is a DHT based approach taken by e.g. Chord and CAN; in these approaches
> values are stored at the nodes with identities "closest" to the key for the
> (hash) value. Furthemore, if services are put on the computer that hosts the
> corresponding key-value pair, the key-to-node mapping still means that this
> computer is generally not owned by the user who decided to provide the
> service(the value) to the network.

Hmmm. I think I don't understand well enough-- my initial reaction is, 
"why bother? would that be worth it?", but I should really understand 
first. What should I read?

What problems is this intended to solve? It seems like storing key/value 
pairs from other systems shouldn't be much of a problem, really... much 
less than routing requests for other systems, it seems at first glance 
(and the approach above doesn't get rid of routing requests as far as I 
can see.)

> On the other, in SWAN approach, each key-value pair can be hosted anywhere as
> the *key-value* pairs self-organise in a virtual look-up network. Key-value
> pairs can therefore be hosted on a computer owned by the user (or on other
> computers, which user has chosen) that actually wants to host the corresponding
> service (value).

Hey, the stuff I quoted was about Gnutella++, not SWAN! Anyway ;-)

- Benja