pukkamustard schreef op wo 02-02-2022 om 10:51 [+0000]: > > The database doesn't seem necessary, the substitute server could > > have > > some end-point > > > >    /publish-this-nar-again-into-IPFS/name-of-the-nar > > > > which, when contacted, inserts the nar again into IPFS.  Then when > > a > > block was unavailable, the client contacts this end-point and > > retries. > > But for a HTTP block endpoint we would still need such a > database/block > storage. > > I think it is important that we do not rely on IPFS for block > storage. The decentralized block distribution should work even if the > IPFS daemon is not available. Do we need a database at all? E.g., if the client cannot download the data in the range [start, end] because the corresponding block has disappeared, can it not simply download that range from https://ci.guix.gnu.org/nar/[...] (not sure about the URI) using a HTTP range request? (Afterwards, the client should insert the block(s) back into IPFS/GNUnet/whatever, maybe using this proposed ‘in-file block store’ such that other clients (using the same DHT mechanism) can benefit.) Greetings, Maxime.