Re: Tracker scrape extension proposal

Nick Johnson wrote:
> On 13/01/2005, at 1:07 PM, Harold Feit - Depthstrike.com Administrator 
> wrote:
> 
>>If you're scraping for 100 torrents, you may be better off just
>>getting the full scrape anyway. As wrong as the behavior appears for
>>multiple info_hash values, the way that it is handled is fairly
>>consistent across different archtypes of trackers (although is more
>>dependent on the archtypes of programming styles). Additional
>>trackers will be supporting this in the near future.
>>
> 
> This isn't such a good idea when the tracker has literally thousands of 
> torrents, though. I'd really like to see an extension that has at least 

1000 torrents would result in 32 kb of 'real' info. That's assuming 
bencoding overhead is compressed away.
100 single-scrape requests/responses already use 50 kb (IP/TCP/HTTP 
overhead).
So a full-scrape might be the best option.

> semi-official support, and for which the fallback behaviour when not 
> supported is all torrents, rather than a single one. If you request 
> multiple hashes, it makes no sense for a client not supporting the 
> feature to return only a single one of them. :/
> 
> -Nick Johnson


 
Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BitTorrent/

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/