On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 2:38 PM, Mike Gonnason <gonnason@gmail.com> wrote:
This idea is what I am concerned about. Until the whole copyright mess gets sorted out, wouldn't these iTracker supernodes be a goldmine of logs for copyright lawyers? They would have a great deal of information about what exactly is being transferred, by whom and for how long.
A good point about the approach of announcing a list of prefixes and preference metrics, rather than doing lookups for each peer individually, is that the supernode's logs will only tell you who used a p2p client at all; nothing about what they did with it. If you have to lookup each peer, the log would be enough to start building a social graph of the p2p network, which would be a good start towards knowing who to send the nastygram to. Reading the following description of the P4P group's current approach, this looks like it's what they're doing:
The approach that P4P takes is to have an intermediate server (which we call an iTracker) that >processes the network maps and provides abstracted guidance (lists of IP prefixes and >percentages) to the p2p networks that allows them to figure out which peers are near each other.
NANOG mailing list NANOG@nanog.org http://mailman.nanog.org/mailman/listinfo/nanog