Print Story Stupid idea #45731
Software
By i (Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 04:03:11 PM EST) (all tags)
Distributed web cache. Slashdot-resistant. Made of home PCs sitting on regular broadband lines (must be able to run a web server).


First, you need a fairly simple public DNS server that supports two additional requests: "add me as <hostname>" and "remove me as <hostname>". That be teh central server.

Second, you need a special web server/apache module/whatever. It should be able to communicate with that little special DNS server, post stuff to other servers, accept stuff from other servers, and time out stuff.

How it works? Suppose we have the distcache.example.com domain. Step zero: everybody wishing to participate registers at our special DNS server as distcache.example.com. Now I want to post a picture of my aunt Jemima to my precious little blog. I'm running that little apache module. First I generate a UUID for that picture, say 12345-67-8. Next, I instruct my apache module to serve the picture whenever a request for http://12345-67-8.distcache.example.com/ is coming. Next, I tell the special DNS server that I'm 12345-67-8.distcache.example.com and wait for requests.

When a request comes, the web server just serves it out. Also, it asks our DNS server for a distcache.example.com's IP. The DNS server just spews out IP in a round-robin fashion, so I get some random participant's IP. I post my picture to that participant's web server. The participant's web server accepts the picture and registers itself as 12345-67-8.distcache.example.com. The next request for aunt Jemima's picture will come to that host, not to mine. That host of course will do the same: post the picture to someone else, etc.

I know I'm stupid. Of course it will never work reliably.

Hell, I forgot how to write in English.

< A little bit older and a little bit slower | BBC White season: 'Rivers of Blood' >
Stupid idea #45731 | 14 comments (14 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback
where the hell have you been by komet (2.00 / 0) #1 Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 04:10:22 PM EST
as for your distributed cache idea, it would of course be goatse'd within minutes. Which is why I support the idea.

--
<ni> komet: You are functionally illiterate as regards trashy erotica.


I was busy posting stuff to LiveJournal. by i (2.00 / 0) #2 Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 04:20:53 PM EST
Just ton't tell anyone, OK?


[ Parent ]

ok by komet (4.00 / 2) #3 Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 04:28:38 PM EST
so that's what stupid ideas #1 to #45730 were.

--
<ni> komet: You are functionally illiterate as regards trashy erotica.
[ Parent ]

If I just list them all here by i (2.00 / 0) #5 Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 04:38:10 PM EST
Hulver will ban me for service abuse!


[ Parent ]

hey, that's a stupid idea! [n/t] by martingale (2.00 / 0) #14 Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 09:59:28 PM EST
Velcomme back to Castle Husicula!
--
$E(X_t|F_s) = X_s,\quad t > s$
[ Parent ]

Actually Not bad... by haplopeart (2.00 / 0) #4 Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 04:32:38 PM EST
...There is a kernel of a workable Idea in there...



Well... by i (2.00 / 0) #6 Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 04:38:53 PM EST
How do you avoid goatseing the system?


[ Parent ]

Didn't fully work that one out... by haplopeart (2.00 / 0) #7 Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 04:54:22 PM EST
...I suppose it would have to be a system of trust...but even that would be vulernable to just one bad link in the chain...

Still think the idea could be fleshed into something viable if someone wanted to tackle it...

[ Parent ]

Or, everyone on the internets could install by chuckles (2.00 / 0) #8 Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 05:32:44 PM EST
Freenet. Yeah, its big downside is that clients have to install it, but it does satisfy the distributed-web-cache-on-home-PCs part.

Skateboarding is a crime.




sounds vaguely like by dr k (2.00 / 0) #9 Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 06:03:20 PM EST
memcached (pronounced mem-cash-dee), which is what keeps LiveJournal from melting down.

:| :| :| :| :|



Coral Cache? [nt] by gazbo (2.00 / 0) #10 Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 06:20:40 PM EST


"Engarde!" cried the larvae, huskily. - Scrymarch



That's funny. by i (2.00 / 0) #11 Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 07:26:15 PM EST
I've thought of a reason why Coral Cache is not suitable for whatever app I had in mind, but I entirely forgot that reason. Now I wonder what it was.


[ Parent ]

How about this: by fluffy (2.00 / 0) #12 Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 07:47:54 PM EST
People could set up HTTP-Freenet gateways, and those go into DNS (preferably also anycasted, so the DNS itself doesn't melt down and can also do preferential routing based on network topology and load and so on). DNS rotation wouldn't be round-robin, but based on a probability from a quality metric, that metric being based on how reliable it is at retrieving any arbitrary key from Freenet (i.e. random clients could occasionally ask a server for a particular Freenet element, and if it gets no response or something other than the original Freenet document — goatse, for example — it'd lower the quality metric).

Another idea: add caching to Tor.


--
ceci n'est pas une signature
i like plaid


sounds a bit like akami by coryking (2.00 / 0) #13 Wed Sep 21, 2005 at 09:15:21 PM EST

We are Siamese if you please. We are Siamese if you don't please.


Stupid idea #45731 | 14 comments (14 topical, 0 hidden) | Trackback