BTW Linux distributions are available to download via bittorrent, so we dont really need Akamai/Limelight here. Is there a reason why Apple has not adopted bit-torrent for distribution? Are there legal/commercial implications using bit-torrent? Glen On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 4:29 PM, Neil Harris <neil@tonal.clara.co.uk> wrote:
On 23/09/13 10:32, John Smith wrote:
Picked this off www.jaluri.com (network and Cisco blog aggregator):
http://routingfreak.wordpress.**com/2013/09/23/ios7s-impact-** on-networks-worldwide/<http://routingfreak.wordpress.com/2013/09/23/ios7s-impact-on-networks-worldwide/>
The consensus seems to be for providers to install CDN servers, if they arent able to cope up with an occasional OS update traffic.
John
Perhaps Apple, Microsoft etc. should consider using Bittorrent as a way of distributing their updates? If ISPs were to run their own Bittorrent servers (with appropriate restrictions, see below), this would then create an instant CDN, with no need to define any other protocols or pay any third parties.
The hard bit would be to create a way for Apple etc. to be able to authoritatively say "we are the content owners, and are happy for you to replicate this locally": but perhaps this could be as simple serving the initial seed from an HTTPS server with a valid certificate? It would then be trivial to create a whitelist of the domains of the top 10 or so distributors of patches, and then everything would work automatically from then on.
-- N.