Gnutella Forums  

Go Back   Gnutella Forums > Gnutella News and Gnutelliums Forums > General Gnutella Development Discussion
Register FAQ The Twelve Commandments Members List Calendar Arcade Find the Best VPN Today's Posts

General Gnutella Development Discussion For general discussion about Gnutella development.


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old January 12th, 2002
Moak's Avatar
Guest
 
Join Date: September 7th, 2001
Location: Europe
Posts: 816
Moak is flying high
Default

PS: Some ppl suggest to combine a small CRC hash with filesize (which is allready in Queryhits, not in Queries or other Gnutella descriptors).... let's play around with this idea. This would be a 32 bit hash + 32 bit filesize (taken from Gnutella protocol v0.4) = 64 bit key to use. Perhaps it would be more unique to use a real hash of 64 bit instead of the 64 bit CRC+filesize combo, e.g. an truncated MD5?

Here an overview of minimum possibilities:
* CRC-32, size 32 bit
* CRC-32 filesize combo, size 64 bit
* MD5 truncated, size 64 bit
* MD5, size 128 bit

Notes: I have choosen MD5 in this case, because it is the smallest and fastest compared to other hashs (SHA1, Tiger, Snefru). The CRC-32 alone is too small. The CRC-filesize combo might be enough, the truncated 64 bit MD5 might be mathematically more unique while it wastes 32 bit information in Queryhits (not in Query, GET, PUSHS). The next higher alternative is a 128 Bit MD5, e.g FastTrack uses an MD5 hash AFAIK.

I'm not sure if a minimum alternative is the best solution for Gnutella's future. Perhaps a 64 bit key does make us happy now, in future with more superpeers and bigger horizons we might want to have a bigger hash (MD5 or SHA1)?

An possibility could be an encoding alla HUGE. The hash has an prefix telling the hash type. For binary Gnutella messages (Query/Queryhits) this could be a payload like: byte 0 = hash type, more bytes = binary hash. The protocoll defines a list of known hash, while clients need a common solution, this list will be short, e.g start with CRC-filesize combo today and use SHA1 in future. In HTTP-alike Gnutella messages we can work with encoded hashs (not binary), similar to the HUGE proposal [1].

Conclusion: I have none. I suggest to implement and test a minimum solution (CRC32-filesize combo) and a bigger hash (MD5 or SHA1) for a while. With more experience in a real world environment we can hopefully find a suitable solution. Feedback, tests and mathematical analysis are welcome!

[1] "HUGE" - http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_gd...roposals/HUGE/ (Yahoo account required)

Last edited by Moak; January 12th, 2002 at 06:54 AM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Gnutella Protocoll v0.7 Proposal Moak General Gnutella Development Discussion 41 August 17th, 2002 10:55 AM
gnutella development plans Iamnacho General Gnutella Development Discussion 11 March 9th, 2002 06:21 PM
My Proposal for XoloX!!! Unregistered User Experience 1 February 6th, 2002 08:11 AM
Xolox and Gnutella development Moak Rants 6 November 25th, 2001 06:05 AM
---a Radical Proposal--- Unregistered General Gnutella / Gnutella Network Discussion 0 September 21st, 2001 12:08 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:03 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0 ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.

Copyright © 2020 Gnutella Forums.
All Rights Reserved.