Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

lit review: data replication / personal data back-ups #60

Open
Tracked by #58
gitaaron opened this issue Mar 17, 2022 · 5 comments
Open
Tracked by #58

lit review: data replication / personal data back-ups #60

gitaaron opened this issue Mar 17, 2022 · 5 comments
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@gitaaron
Copy link
Collaborator

gitaaron commented Mar 17, 2022

@gitaaron gitaaron added this to the Docs v0.1 milestone Mar 17, 2022
@gitaaron gitaaron self-assigned this Mar 17, 2022
@gitaaron gitaaron moved this to In Progress in Fula and dApps Mar 17, 2022
@gitaaron
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I don't think BitSwap will help with this use case since it seems that the entire contents of the file (root CID only) will be transferred and thus consume resources/bandwidth unnecessarily for each change.

We also want to do the opposite - instead of asking all peers if they have a CID we want to advertise to all peers that there is a newly created CID and they should download it.

There are probably learnings on protocol/wire transfer so it could be worth it to dig deeper.

@gitaaron
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Reading a bit further - looks like ipfs-cluster is promising and they mention using BitSwap so perhaps my previous comment is incorrect.

@gitaaron
Copy link
Collaborator Author

One potential issue with ipfs-cluster is a lack of relays for NAT hole punching.

This network does not interact with the main IPFS network, nor with other private IPFS networks and is solely used so that Cluster peers can communicate and operate....

This also means that Cluster peers operate separately from IPFS with regards to NAT hole punching, ports etc.

One thought is possibly using an ad hoc VPN instead? Problem with that is it would incur a master/slave architecture where a single BOX would have to operate as the VPN server. Still - perhaps something to look into in the future if NAT traversal becomes a sticking point?

@gitaaron gitaaron changed the title lit review: data replication lit review: data replication / personal data back-ups Mar 19, 2022
@farhoud
Copy link
Contributor

farhoud commented Mar 19, 2022

One potential issue with ipfs-cluster is a lack of relays for NAT hole punching.

This network does not interact with the main IPFS network, nor with other private IPFS networks and is solely used so that Cluster peers can communicate and operate....

This also means that Cluster peers operate separately from IPFS with regards to NAT hole punching, ports etc.

One thought is possibly using an ad hoc VPN instead? Problem with that is it would incur a master/slave architecture where a single BOX would have to operate as the VPN server. Still - perhaps something to look into in the future if NAT traversal becomes a sticking point?

Base on my experience we can still use
Rely v2
and webrtc signaling server for hole punching

@gitaaron
Copy link
Collaborator Author

gitaaron commented Mar 21, 2022

Base on my experience we can still use Rely v2 and webrtc signaling server for hole punching

Moving this convo over to - #63 (comment)

@gitaaron gitaaron moved this from In Progress to After-kickstarter in Fula and dApps Mar 24, 2022
@ehsan6sha ehsan6sha removed the status in Fula and dApps Sep 21, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: No status
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants