http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/item/8/
[746 votes] Solution #1: Auto-generated solution of idea #8


]]> en-us Thu, 28 Feb 2008 14:17:20 +0000 Fri, 23 Oct 2009 08:19:31 +0000 QAPoll module http://brainstorm.ubuntu.com/idea/8/ Thu, 28 Feb 2008 14:48:42 +0000
]]> Thu, 28 Feb 2008 15:00:45 +0000 Thu, 28 Feb 2008 16:48:03 +0000 Thu, 28 Feb 2008 21:10:59 +0000 I have two computer with ubuntu so every update is download twice. ]]> Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:37:36 +0000 Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:41:44 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:01:48 +0000
Synchronizing updates across an unmanaged distributed network.

Not everyone's storage space is equal which could lead to serious problems if the disk should become too full.

It introduces the possibility of people using fake file to exploit systems in "untrusted" zones.

Bandwidth limitations set by ISPs could cause account suspensions.]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:05:45 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:16:23 +0000
Maybe Bittorrent could be modified to fit this one better.]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:46:42 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 02:06:19 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 02:14:19 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 02:25:51 +0000
Mike]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 02:33:57 +0000
The one point that no-one has mentioned so far is this: Bittorrent is designed to distribute one specific large set of files, while apt tends to give a different set of small files to each user.

Basically, you'd either need to have one torrent for each package - which would be dog slow because each downloader would always be done before they got any upload credit - or, you could have one big torrent of every file in the repository, and that's wildly inefficient too.]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 03:22:36 +0000
I also wish that Ubuntu would release an upgrade package "archive", available via bittorrent, so that we could pre-seed our apt cache prior to initiating a complete distribution upgrade. This would be very useful, and better than downloading the entire install CD just to extract the debs from.]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 05:07:31 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 06:06:02 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 07:20:00 +0000
http://packages.debian.org/sid/apt-transport-debtorrent
http://packages.debian.org/sid/debtorrent
]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 09:09:12 +0000
But surely with ahavi it should be possible for Ubuntu machines on the same LAN to organise amongst themselves and not needlessly download things twice without having to manually set them all to go through a single permanent machine.
]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 11:48:37 +0000 But for executable code, no thanks.]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:13:04 +0000
deb packages are signed so the transport used does not have any impact in security. They are verified and checked against the pgp key and will show a warning if the package is not signed or the signer is not known.]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 14:14:11 +0000 - it's not default
- files are cryptographically signed and verified.


]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:51:46 +0000
http://www.metalinker.org/]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 20:33:48 +0000 Fri, 29 Feb 2008 22:11:49 +0000
If an ISP blocks bittorrent traffic, apt can use encryption.

Even if traffic shaping is used to detect bittorrent traffic, the software can still adjust the number of connections it has open to mimmic other types of traffic (speed wouldn't be as great, but it's something.)

As for fake data being distributed, apt can always do a checksum against what the repo says it should be.

However, FTP/HTTP will always have their place.]]> Fri, 29 Feb 2008 23:44:25 +0000
Why not implement a very low complexity torrent program right into the update script that ubuntu downloads when it is updating to the next version. All it would have to do is grab the alternate iso and set it as a source. It could also gracefully fall back, or the user could opt out. It could even display a message on completion of the upgrade requesting that the user seed for a day or two.

This would take a huge load off the servers, would most likely be far simpler to implement then then torrents in apt itself, and on release day, it could make hours difference in the download time. New versions of Ubuntu could take over the world!!]]> Sat, 01 Mar 2008 07:56:47 +0000 Sat, 01 Mar 2008 11:09:36 +0000
Instead, I would like to see better mirroring, more updated mirrors and such. Perhaps stop rsync:ing the mirrors and instead run reverse http-caches, such as Varnish?]]> Sat, 01 Mar 2008 11:38:25 +0000 Mon, 03 Mar 2008 09:32:07 +0000 Wed, 05 Mar 2008 12:50:14 +0000 Fri, 07 Mar 2008 13:58:32 +0000