Fedora Core 2 Update: kernel-2.6.6-1.435

Ed K. ed at hp.uab.edu
Fri Jun 18 13:32:23 UTC 2004


On Fri, 18 Jun 2004, Marc Lucke wrote:
> Rodolfo J. Paiz wrote:
>> At 21:04 6/17/2004, Ed K. wrote:
>>> I can't wait for ftp to retire for organized archives. http and 
>>> bittorrent
>>> should be all that is needed. no http header equivalent for ftp.
>> 
>> Just curious... I thought FTP was significantly more efficient for 
>> transferring files...? Yes/no/why?
>> 
> FTP sucks for transferring many files.  HTTP has something chunked transfers 
> or something (?) and persistent connections and you don't need to worry about 
> passive or active or firewalls, binary or text or anything.  P2P technology 
> is even better because everyone is the server.  FTP is still OK, I guess, for 
> large file transfer.
>

let me just add a little, FTP uses UDP with its own traffic shaper algorithm
that is better at taking 100% of the bandwidth. But who really wants to use
100% anyway? Your network connection will become useless for anything else.

when transferring many small files, http with persistent connections will
blow away an ftp mirror, any day any night.

What is why the days are numbered. for small files, use http. for large 
files (iso), use bittorrent. Plus the bonus of http headers are very
important for caching hierarchies.

{corrections from anyone......?}

ed



Security on the internet is impossible without strong, open, 
and unhindered encryption.





More information about the fedora-list mailing list