bittorrent-dht VS ipfs

I'm not talking about the consensus protocol of the blockchain itself, but of the p2p algorithms underlying it, e.g. using Kademlia for service discovery and message routing. I'm asking why a distributed system would choose something like Consul (which uses Raft, and requires a coordinator node) instead of running a decentralized protocol like Kademlia (which has no coordinator nodes) within their distributed single-tenant environment.

I did a bit more research last night, and discovered that Bitfinex actually does something like this internally (anyone know if this is up to date?) [0] — they built a service discovery mesh by storing arbitrary data on a DHT implementing BEP44 (using webtorrent/bittorrent-dht [1]).

This seems pretty cool to me, and IMO any modern distributed system should consider running decentralized protocols to benefit from their robustness properties. Deploying a node to a decentralized protocol requires no coordination or orchestration, aside from it simply joining the network. Scaling a service is as simple as joining a node to the network and announcing its availability of an implementation of that service.

At first glance, this looks like a competitive advantage, because it decouples the operational and maintenance costs of the network from the size of the network.

So I'm wondering if there is a consistent tradeoff in exchange for this robustness — are decentralized applications more complex to implement but simpler to operate? Is latency of decentralized protocols (e.g. average number of hops to lookup item in a DHT) untenably higher than that of distributed protocols (e.g. one hop once to get instructions from coordinator, then one hop to lookup item in distributed KV)? Does a central coordinator eliminate some kind of principle agent problem, resulting in e.g. a more balanced usage of the hashing keyspace?

Decentralization emerged because distributed solutions fail in untrusted environments — but this doesn't mean that decentralized solutions fail in trusted environments. So why not consider more decentralized protocols to scale internal systems?

[0] https://github.com/bitfinexcom/grenache

[1] https://github.com/webtorrent/bittorrent-dht

Yes the database is fixed. I would like to make it updateable using web2web or mutable torrents (BEP44) which the WebTorrent DHT supports.

> CDNs

If you think IPFS is trying to "re-spin CDNs as their invention", I'm pretty sure you misunderstand what IPFS. The homepage is a great starting point if you're curious rather than antagonistic: https://ipfs.tech/

> IPFS doesn't solve persistence of data

I don't think it claims to solve this either? What it does claim to solve is the persistence of identifiers of data.

> doesn't solve churn in p2p systems

What P2P system has ever done so or even claimed to have done so?

We will create a web app that will let users mint a NFT in one click: creating an AI art from a prompt, storing it on IPFS and mint the unique NFT in Polygon so you can see it on OpenSea. Pretty cool right ?

IPFS, which stands for Inter-Planetary File System, is a decentralized storage system where files are distributed among peers in a peer-to-peer (P2P) network. It operates on a "content addressable" model, meaning that each file is given a unique hash that serves as its identifier. By using this hash, you can retrieve any file from any IPFS node in the network.

Like this? https://ipfs.tech/

Was thinking of something and figured it would be a good opportunity to ask here. With the censorship madness going on in the world and furry community included, I often worry if even places like e621 can remain free and open in the face of increasing pressure by increasingly angry and authoritarian crowds. For both this and other geek reasons I've been interested in decentralized internet technology for a long time, following projects like IFPS which I just love as a concept.

Using the Interplanetary File System, a real thing that exists today, designed for this purpose.

I post a lot about IPFS, I was using the 'ipfs mount' to virtually offer my entire collection from my NAS (on a private 'swarm' of course) to the remote stations.