Difference between revisions of "Large File Transfer"

From Dryad wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(SCP)
(BioTorrents)
Line 40: Line 40:
 
== BioTorrents ==
 
== BioTorrents ==
  
Pro:  
+
Pro:
 
* can transfer large files efficiently
 
* can transfer large files efficiently
  
 
Con:
 
Con:
 
* The process of creating a torrent file is too complex for a typical Dryad user.
 
* The process of creating a torrent file is too complex for a typical Dryad user.
 +
 +
== WeTransfer ==
 +
 +
(This is the mechanism being used in fall 2011)
 +
 +
== Aspera ==
 +
 +
FASP mechanism

Revision as of 19:21, 6 November 2011

Dryad needs to accept uploads of large files. These files must be transferred outside the normal submission system unless/until a better transfer mechanism is built into the submission system.

HTTP

Some institutions use HTTP for large transfers. Perhaps we can reconfigure our servers to work better over HTTP?

Pro:

  • can be built into the submission system easily

Con:

  • times out easily, especially on low-quality Internet connections

FTP

We are currently testing file transfers via ftp2.nescent.org. When a transfer is needed, NESCent IT must turn on the service, and they should be notified to shut down the service after a transfer is complete.

Pro:

  • simple and well understood

Con:

  • security issues

SCP

Pro:

  • Quick, easy, secure.

Con:

  • Still not a standard install on Windows machines.

Mailed USB key

Pro:

  • can transfer very large files without worrying about size and bandwidth concerns

Con:

  • doesn't seem "professional"
  • may take a long time for international authors

BioTorrents

Pro:

  • can transfer large files efficiently

Con:

  • The process of creating a torrent file is too complex for a typical Dryad user.

WeTransfer

(This is the mechanism being used in fall 2011)

Aspera

FASP mechanism