### Enhancing Torrent Protocols with an Optional Versioning Layer/Plugin
Hello, I’ve been exploring ways to address the inherent limitations of traditional torrent protocols—particularly their lack of native support for temporal versioning, update pointers, and decentralized forking—while preserving the robustness and widespread adoption of torrents as a decentralized storage system. The goal is not to replace torrents, but to enhance them with an optional, backward-compatible layer that enables advanced version management. This layer is especially useful for files that are meant to evolve over time—such as historical documentation, games in development, or ongoing projects—while static files that require no updates remain unaffected. Below, I present a detailed proposal that covers the following features:
---
#### Immutable Core with Optional Versioning
- **Immutable Original Files:**
Once a file (version 1) is released via torrent, it remains immutable. As it is seeded across the network, it acts as a permanent archive, keeping the current torrent system intact.
- **Optional Version Pointers:**
An optional metadata layer—either embedded within the torrent file or provided as an accompanying file (for example, with an extension like `versioning.verdat`)—can contain cryptographically secured pointers linking version 1 to subsequent versions (e.g., version 2). Key points include:
- **Pre-Release Pointers:**
The protocol should allow the original uploader to publish an update pointer even if the new version is not yet fully ready. This “reservation” of an update address means that once version 2 is complete and hosted, it is seamlessly integrated.
- **Digital Signatures:**
The pointer is generated and signed by the original author using digital signature schemes (such as ECDSA or EdDSA) to ensure any update is verifiably linked to the original source.
- **Optional Nature:**
If no update is released, version 1 remains the final, immutable file. Clients that support this feature can automatically check for and notify users about updates, while clients without the plugin simply download and seed the original file.
- **External Metadata and Plugin-Based Approaches (Conceptual):**
Recognizing that the inherent immutability of v1 torrents precludes in-place updates, this proposal leaves room for open discussion on potential workarounds:
- One possibility is the use of an external “side‑car” metadata file. This file would accompany the torrent (e.g. named `versioning.verdat`) and store mutable update pointers, allowing a plugin-enabled client to monitor for updates without altering the core v1 torrent.
- Another approach is to implement a plugin layer that periodically polls a DHT-based update channel (using public key–based mutable entries similar to BEP‑46) for a new info hash. When a new version is available, the client can prompt the user to switch, or—even more ambitiously—attempt to merge data from both the old and updated swarms for seamless continuity.
- This layer is designed to be entirely optional, leaving the original torrent protocol unchanged for legacy clients while offering an enhanced, version-aware experience for users who choose to opt in.
---
#### Optional Mechanisms and Multisig Control
- **Automatic Update Discovery:**
When a user downloads version 1, a plugin-enabled client can inspect an embedded pointer or the associated external metadata file to determine whether a new version (version 2) exists. If an update is available and the pointer is unlocked, the client can prompt the user to download the new version.
- **Multisignature (Multisig) for Update Release (Optional):**
To enhance security and control, an optional multisig feature could be implemented. In this scenario, the original uploader or a group of trusted collaborators would need to sign off on an update. This approach further ensures that only authorized parties can publish updates, which is especially beneficial in collaborative projects.
---
#### Decentralized Forking and Versioning
- **Decentralized Forking:**
Beyond simple updates, the proposed layer supports forking for any binary file—whether it’s a game, movie, or document. For example, after version 1 is released, a user might decide to create a fork (e.g., “version 1 fork”) that represents an alternative development branch, while still being cryptographically linked to the original.
- **Separate Lineage and Verification:**
The original version does not automatically point to the fork. Instead, the fork exists as an independent branch, and in a later update (say, version 2), the original uploader could optionally acknowledge the fork by including it as historical metadata. Every pointer—even for forks—is signed digitally to ensure authenticity.
- **Optionality:**
This forking functionality is entirely optional. Creators who prefer not to acknowledge forks can simply ignore them, while those seeking decentralized collaboration can branch off and maintain multiple streams of development. It is important to consider that the fork function pointing to a file would not need to have any basis in truth and in practice it would be the same as today making a torrent available where there is another torrent inside it, the function, in it the first branch, would only serve to inform that your file has its origin in the file that you set as past, again, this info do not need to be true. considering that branches can be relative
---
#### Integration and Compatibility
- **Overlay or Plugin on Top of Torrents:**
The ideal solution is to implement this versioning mechanism as an overlay or plugin on top of the existing torrent protocol. This allows for gradual adoption and does not require a complete overhaul of current systems.
- **Backward Compatibility:**
Legacy clients will continue to download and seed the file without interpreting the additional metadata. The versioning information—whether embedded in the torrent or stored externally—ensures that even if updates occur, the original file’s integrity and availability are preserved.
- **Interoperability with v2 Implementations (Conceptual):**
Although BEP‑46 (and native BitTorrent v2) already introduce similar update mechanisms, many peers and clients still operate on v1. An ideal approach would be to design the external metadata or plugin layer so that its data format is consistent with BEP‑46. For example:
- Using the same digital signature scheme allows both v1 overlay plugins and v2 clients to verify updates from the publisher.
- Update pointers stored externally can mimic the structure of v2 update entries, ensuring that clients can eventually interoperate across both systems.
This dual‑mode support would allow a client to check for an update pointer natively embedded (in a v2 or hybrid torrent) or via an external metadata file (for v1 torrents), providing a pathway toward future interoperability without forcing immediate protocol changes.
---
#### Underlying Technologies and Approaches
- **Cryptographic Techniques:**
- **Digital Signatures:** Securely sign update and fork pointers so users can verify authenticity.
- **Hash Pointers and Merkle Trees:** Create a verifiable chain of file versions and forks using efficient data structures.
- **Encryption Schemes:** Optionally “timelock” update pointers so they remain hidden until released by the uploader.
- **Distributed Systems and Storage Protocols:**
- **BitTorrent & DHTs:** Leverage the existing BitTorrent protocol and Distributed Hash Tables (DHT) to distribute both the core file and associated metadata.
- **IPFS/IPNS:** Concepts from IPFS—such as immutable content addressing and mutable naming—could inspire alternative methods of managing dynamic update pointers.
- **Blockchain (Optional):** A lightweight blockchain or similar ledger might serve as an auxiliary record for update pointers and forks, though scalability challenges must be considered.
---
#### Theoretical Example
Imagine an anonymous developer who has been a fan of a particular intellectual property all their life decides to create a game based on that IP. The developer faces several challenges:
1. **Release and Distribution Challenges:**
The game might be released via torrents on platforms like GitHub or social networks, but centralized companies could remove or block the torrent file.
2. **Update and Maintenance Issues:**
No single developer can produce bug-free, long-term supported software. As system components evolve, the game may require frequent updates, which users would otherwise have to track down manually.
3. **Anonymity and Trust:**
Remaining anonymous makes it difficult for the developer to gain public recognition and for users to verify that a torrent is truly the original.
4. **Potential Solution with Versioning:**
By implementing an integrated versioning system, the update problem can be addressed while preserving the developer’s anonymity. An external metadata file or plugin-based approach could maintain a verifiable chain of updates, allowing users to confidently download the official version. This mechanism could be implemented in a flexible, open manner—leaving room for debate about how much data to reuse between swarms and how to best manage user experience during updates.
---
#### Conclusion
This proposal envisions an enhancement to the current torrent ecosystem through an optional versioning layer that supports:
- **Immutable File Storage with Update Pointers:**
Pointers can be set even before a new version exists, allowing seamless future integration.
- **Optional Automatic Discovery of Updates:**
Plugin-enabled clients can automatically check for newer versions and prompt users accordingly.
- **Decentralized Forking:**
Alternative branches of development can be created and optionally recognized by the original uploader.
- **Optional Multisig Control:**
Collaborative or high-security update releases can be managed with multisignature approval.
Additionally, by introducing open and flexible ideas—such as external “side‑car” metadata files and a plugin‑based update mechanism—the proposal leaves space for discussion on how best to retrofit versioning into BitTorrent v1 without disrupting existing functionality. Such a design could eventually allow interoperability with native v2 implementations by aligning update pointer formats and cryptographic methods.
The implementation details remain open and intentionally vague to encourage community input and experimentation. This approach is meant to preserve the strengths of the current torrent ecosystem while paving the way for a future where advanced version control and file evolution are possible, all without requiring a complete overhaul of existing protocols.
---
This is a concept proposal—a starting point intended to spark further discussion and collaborative refinement in the community. Feedback, alternate ideas, and practical experimentation are all welcome as we explore how to best bring versioning capabilities to the enduring torrent ecosystem.