Now blogging at diego's weblog. See you over there!

there and back again

The objectives of [this software] are 1) to promote sharing of files (computer programs and/or data), 2) to encourage indirect or implicit (via programs) use of remote computers, 3) to shield a user from variations in file storage systems among hosts, and 4) to transfer data reliably and efficiently.
Hm. Where did I get that from? Gnutella? Freenet? Some other fancier P2P app?

Nope. It's from RFC 959, circa 1985, which defines the FTP protocol (RFC 765, which it obsoletes, dates from 1980). "To promote sharing of files (computer programs and/or data)". Ain't that a riot?

One of the points I made in my thesis was that initially the Internet was truly a P2P system, and only later it moved into the client/server direction, only to slowly creep back into decentralized mode. FTP, which we hardly think about anymore, was a great example of this that I didn't use.

Consider that the original mode in which FTP worked was one where the client was actually a server as well. How so? Well, these days most FTP connections are "passive mode" connections. The "passive" there is talking about the ftp client. Normally, an FTP server accepts connections along with a port specification on the client. The server then opens connections to the client, which must have its own server for that. Passive mode enabled clients to open all connections themselves, a clear necessity as systems started to find themselves behind firewalls, NATs, and such.

The point is that even FTP, which we tend to think of as one of the prototypical client/server applications, was actually one of the prototypical peer-to-peer applications. The client and server divided the load, clients being responsible for serving transfer connections, and servers for the serving control channel connections.

There are many "loops" of this sort, sometimes repeated decade from decade. A lot of computing has been about making the same things easier, faster, or more scalable. And what's important about this is that, hard as it might be, it's always useful to know what happened before, from the 60s onward. Revisiting ideas is fun, as long as we avoid revisiting the mistakes: we should be trying to make new mistakes, not repeat the ones from the past. :)

PS: let's see how long it takes someone to note the title of the book from which the title of this entry was, er, "downloaded". :)

Posted by diego on March 13, 2005 at 9:33 PM

Copyright © Diego Doval 2002-2011.