From what I have read on the upcoming implementation on i2p in qbit, I do not forsee it being adopted by the core torrent user base. The main issue I have with it is that while you can download from clearnet peers, you are only able to seed to other i2p peers. This completely eliminates any adoption by anyone using private trackers. Its not like the guys in brazil are going to jump through an extra hoop to hide their ip since they never needed to in the first place, so they can be ruled out for adoption as well. What I really fear is that its going to create a completely unnecessary schism in the userbase with a sort of ‘leechnet’ walled garden of i2p users which would hurt the greater availability of seeders. I also haven’t gotten a straight answer from anyone how ports are going to work in i2p, since normally its imperative to have a forwarded port in order to be a full participant. Unless i2p users can seed to clearnet users without issue, I am going to be worried about the impact on torrent health as a whole.
I’m not saying you’re wrong because I don’t know the i2p details, but it sounds like you may be mixing up being connectable with seeding vs leeching.
Once a connection is established, data can go in any direction, seeding (uploading) or downloading. Getting a connection between two peers in the first place needs one party to be connectable via an ip:port. That is already a problem with a massive number of clients behind NATed VPNs
You are not logged in. However you can subscribe from another Fediverse account, for example Lemmy or Mastodon. To do this, paste the following into the search field of your instance: [email protected]
⚓ A community devoted to in-depth debate on topics concerning digital piracy, ethical problems, and legal advancements.
From what I have read on the upcoming implementation on i2p in qbit, I do not forsee it being adopted by the core torrent user base. The main issue I have with it is that while you can download from clearnet peers, you are only able to seed to other i2p peers. This completely eliminates any adoption by anyone using private trackers. Its not like the guys in brazil are going to jump through an extra hoop to hide their ip since they never needed to in the first place, so they can be ruled out for adoption as well. What I really fear is that its going to create a completely unnecessary schism in the userbase with a sort of ‘leechnet’ walled garden of i2p users which would hurt the greater availability of seeders. I also haven’t gotten a straight answer from anyone how ports are going to work in i2p, since normally its imperative to have a forwarded port in order to be a full participant. Unless i2p users can seed to clearnet users without issue, I am going to be worried about the impact on torrent health as a whole.
BiglyBT can download/seed to both clearnet and I2P users
It says it can but I never had any luck getting it to work
yeah I dont always get i2p seeds when I’m downloading or uploading clearnet torrents but it does happen every so often
I’m not saying you’re wrong because I don’t know the i2p details, but it sounds like you may be mixing up being connectable with seeding vs leeching.
Once a connection is established, data can go in any direction, seeding (uploading) or downloading. Getting a connection between two peers in the first place needs one party to be connectable via an ip:port. That is already a problem with a massive number of clients behind NATed VPNs
Doesn’t it make the use of private trackers obsolete when no one can get sued anymore because they’re all using an anonymous overlay network?
Its makes VPN obsolete, not sure about Private Trackers, they have a lot of things that public don’t due to retention.