A partial archive of discourse.wicg.io as of Saturday February 24, 2024.

Magnetized src and things

SoniEx2
2018-03-20

I’d like to be able to use a magnetized jquery, because we really should not be using CDNs for something as popular as that.

jhpratt
2018-03-20

Could you elaborate? What’s wrong with using CDNs.

SoniEx2
2018-03-20

CDNs can track the sites you visit, magnetized scripts cannot.

joeyparrish
2018-03-28

What’s a magnetized script?

Garbee
2018-03-28

You can always write your own extension (or find a community one if it already exists) that intercepts requests for popular scripts and serves them from the extension locally w/o hitting the network at all.

Why should browsers handle this internally?

SoniEx2
2018-03-28

Why shouldn’t CDNs contribute to eachother?

You wanna help serve jQuery? run a seedbox. users will automatically start using it.

It also solves many of the issues of current-day CDNs.

We should build a new web, one where everyone is a contributor. It benefits everyone.

jhpratt
2018-03-29

Talking about a “new web” is far beyond the scope of this CG.

most developers will just copy the src, and not pay attention to the hash or referrer options

What makes you think they would use a magnet link instead?

Browsers cache data, but not metadata. Every time you load a website, it’s still gonna send a request for the metadata.

This sounds like a browser problem, not a CDN problem.

Additionally, how would the overhead be dealt with? You’d potentially have to connect to yet another machine (or multiple), which takes some amount of time. And that’s not to mention the additional HTTP headers being sent back and forth, which, though minimal, certainly add up.

SoniEx2
2018-03-29

uTP, not HTTP.

Also, websites still can’t force a caching policy different from the CDN.

The CDN is free to always require the brower to make new requests.

This is solved by magnetized transfers.

DoS is solved by magnetized transfers.

Not having local mirrors (whatever you call a CDN thingy) is also solved by magnetized transfers.

The latency is lower because you’ll be talking to your LAN. The TCP handshake to the CDN takes 60 ms while in that time you’ve already transferred half the file over the LAN.

SaschaNaz
2018-04-05

uTP, not HTTP.

So you mean browsers should support BitTorrent magnet links provided with Distributed Hash Table, right?

SoniEx2
2018-04-05

uTP, the bittorrent transfer protocol. the one that auto-adapts to other bandwidth sources.