Is it possible to use apjp on a paas as proxy to connect to another apjp on paas?

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Sorry that I cannot write the issue following the recommended format of google 
code, as I would like to make a suggestion instead of reporting a problem of 
apjp.
My experience of using apjp is great, however, I find that some features of 
apjp can be improved to fit better of Chinese internet environment. All paas 
servers mentioned in apjp's wiki page, save cloudbees, are still accessible for 
chinese users. But depending on different ISPs, differences of connection speed 
to each server is huge and this is what I have just experienced. One month ago 
I was using Tie Tong China, a relatively small ISP  which blocks even some 
streaming sites within China, with a pitiful ADSL 2M in a remote area of China, 
I spend quite some time testing loading speed of different paases through 
youtube. GAE and jelastic(japan) are fastest, about 220KB/s, the slowest comes 
from dotcloud,160KB/S. But even by using apjp on dotcloud I can watch 480 
pixeled youtube videos smoothly. Now I'm at Beijing using ADSL 6M of China 
Unicom, the biggest ISP of China. The fastest paas is still GAE, 600KB/s, then 
jelastic, at 300KB/S, while all other paases can run no more than 
50KB/s(unbearable). The worst is that being fastest, GAE changes its ip every 
minute and its use is much restricted than the quite slow openshift and others. 
Given facts above mentioned, I wonder whether I can use GAE as a proxy to 
connect to openshift and others. I setup respectively local server ports of GAE 
and Openshift 10000 and 9999 and fill in Openshift's APJP_HTTP_PROXY_SERVER 
127.0.0.1:9999. Then apjp-Openshift indeed connect through GAE and I can browse 
ordinary webpages. But it transpires that in this case firstly, I cannot watch 
any flash video online, secondly, I cannot download any file.
I tried different combinations of any two paases and resulted in the same two 
restrictions.(in fact, I can use a php+paas to download a file, but cannot 
download from any site like rapidshare etc.) Then I use bitvise to connect and 
port-forward ssh of openshift, change this ssh/socks5 proxy to http proxy 
through polipo and configure Jelastic to connect through this http proxy and 
these two restrictions disappear.
So I wonder if the next version of apjp can take consideration of this use: to 
make apjp on any paas/php(or just GAE) function fully as a proxy that enables 
apjp on another paas/php to connect through it. If this works, as there are so 
many php servers, we can use apjp to circumvent any Geo-restrictions of ips on 
specific websites, and the connection speed would always be quite satisfying.

Original issue reported on code.google.com by Tintinch...@gmail.com on 10 Mar 2013 at 2:10

[GoogleCodeExporter]

As you probably know, GAE does not work like the other PAAS. GAE applications 
have restrictions: 1GB Outgoing Bandwidth, 1GB Incoming Bandwidth, 5MB URLFetch 
Request, 32MB URLFetch Response, ..
So when APJP needs to download something big (>32MB) with GAE, APJP will split 
that download in multiple small downloads (HTTP Range Request).
But that does not work when you forward to another APJP_REMOTE server.
APJP_REMOTE will need to be updated.

Original comment by jeroen.v...@gmail.com on 11 Mar 2013 at 6:31

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

 I've heard of these restrictions of GAE, the traffic quota doesn't count. Most people(including me) don't need to download/upload more than 10 GB by day. And since by every gmail account one can apply 10 APPS,while one can have as many as you want gmail accounts,if apjp can allow in its local_properties more than 10 remote servers, the gae traffic quota actually disappears. Despite of all disadvantage of GAE, it  also has advantages than other paas:not only will it be always the fastest(because of google's servers distributed in the world),it will also never be blocked. No contry will be so fucked up to block all ips of google. Openshift is a good example to illustrate this, it is now only possible to connect to app of openshift using https in china.I fear that after some time it might be completely blocked by GFW like cloudbees. 
    Also, why can't apjp connect to gae through ipv6. I'm now using goagent's(you have probably heard about this similar project) ipv6 mood to connect to my gae apps through gogo client's ipv6 in ipv4 NAT traverse tunnel, setting the ipv6 remote server in taiwan, and the speed is at the bandwidth's highest power. 
    You said that APJP_REMOTE need update for this use, so it sounds like it is technically possible. Actually I(and many others,I believe) would like to pay for this version of apjp, since it will be way much faster than any vpn and offers better anonymity. APJP will then be a more powerful and faster Tor.If it is possible, you can make a big business out of it.

Original comment by Tintinch...@gmail.com on 12 Mar 2013 at 1:38

[GoogleCodeExporter]

1. Speed Problem
The speed depends on your ISP restriction and proxy server location. For me, my 
small ISP who buys bandwidth from China Telecom limits to 1/4 of highest speed 
about 19:00-01:00 when connecting to foreign websites, especially to U.S. East 
Coast. And normally connecting to U.S. West Coast is faster than the East 
because of Across-Pacific fiber-optic. Google servers (IP 74.125.*.*) are in 
West Coast and Openshif (buys Amazon services) ones are in the East, so to 
Google is faster than to Openshift. That's why GAE or HK/JP/SG PaaS and VPS 
based proxy is the first choice.

2. IP Changing Problem
Not like Goagent, the respond speed of APJP with multi GAE APP_IDs is slower 
than a single one. And GAE will assign every APP_ID connection to one IP (maybe 
randomly), that's why you said Google changes IP. I run APJP with just one 
APP_ID, then change another one when it's over quota. I have tested Goagent 
(without pac file) and Wallproxy (old and new version) with only one APP_ID 
too, all run well without IP changing problem. You can test on this site 
http://www.hdzone.org where you'll be logout if your IP changes or 
http://geoip.flagfox.net.

3. Safety
I don't like Goagent even it's the fastest one and Wallproxy (new version) as 
they use pac file or proxy switch browser plugins or directly connect to IP (to 
watch Youtue) that I don't know when I'm safe under the proxy. Yet I can change 
config to run totally over proxy. But most importantly they don't encrypt data! 
So I DO NOT beleive them. I prefer APJP/JAP/Wallproxy-plugins(old version with 
password to encrypt data). If you DO care about safety, I suggest you pick up 
these three. If you want to say something to fu*k GCD, use JAP + TOR even VPN + 
JAP + TOR. Conversely, Goagent is better in the speed and easier to deploy and 
use.

4. IPv6
As GFW do not yet have a good way to block IPv6 connection selectively, IPv6 
deployment is limited execpt school network (School local network inside China 
local network). So proxy with IPv6 supported is better. Hope APJP/JAP to add 
this function.

5. Payment
China is a huge market. You can see these years VPN sales is surprising. 
However, now GFW can block VPN and SSH selectively through self-studying. On 
the other hand, PaaS and VPS based proxies are traffic unique as different 
implementations (java/js/python/ruby). I think they are better substitutes. The 
only problem is they are hard to deploy for most users. So Jeroen you can think 
about this business to sale service to Chinese. You develop program and deploy 
to a variety of PaaS and VPS. Users just need an exe file and proxy url and 
password, and they can select PaaS or VPS with different price base on 
connection speed.

Original comment by westmin...@gmail.com on 12 Mar 2013 at 8:00

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

by the way, I find two paas-paas combination almost without any problem(haven't 
tried to download larger file than 200m), 
me-Jelastic-openshift-internet,me-jelastic-cloudfoundry-internet.

Original comment by Tintinch...@gmail.com on 12 Mar 2013 at 11:02

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

1. Speed Problem
Goolge's servers that are in the ip range 74.125.*.*,after 18th congress, have 
been consistently hassled by GFW, which means that for every 20min Chinese 
users cannot access them for a few minutes. Google's servers that perform well 
now for chinese are 203.208.46.13*, which are located in China. One reason that 
goagent is fast is because it set these ips as default.And china telecom do 
have much better performance in connecting to North america servers than china 
unicom, but considering the latter's number of users(I think it's the biggest), 
the speed of connection to remote servers pose a serious problem for many 
chinese.
We cannot get around isp restrictions, but we should try to get the most out of 
it. As google had its servers, ip4 and ipv6, in many locations. GAE offers the 
best speed experience.The only other way would be to deploy apjp on a chinese 
cloud hosting service and use it as proxy for american and european paas,but 
due to chinese service qualities, this would absolutely not work. 

2. IP Changing Problem
No matter by using goagent or apjp-gae under one appid, tracemyip.org always 
shows my ip changes every second. Also, you can test the truth of it by 
downloading files from rarefile.com/monsterfile.com and many other share sites; 
 you can never get the download link by using GAE, because the same ip session 
has expired in their 60secs waiting time. Also check a streaming site that 
scrutinize your ip constancy:http://vk.com/video166130734_163182395, see if you 
can watch this video, the site checks if your ip has changed every minute. 
My confusion pops up as I use just-ping.com to see ip of my appspot site, there 
it shows the constancy of ip. I guess the ip address I get by ping my GAE and 
the Ip address I was distributed by using apjp-gae are not the same. But anyway 
I cannot use GAE under one appid to download from file-share sites or streaming 
sites that check constancy of ip.

3. Safety
I also have no good impression of PAC file and I never use it. About safety, 
there is a thing that bewilders me. Goagent indeed doesn't encrypt data, but as 
now all http request to google's ip to look for gae-app are blocked, we only 
use https to connect to google, so aren't our data also encrypted? Of course, 
APJP is safer, as it encrypts further of this https. Also, I didn't find any 
difference in speed between APJP and Goagent under the same google ip.

4. IPv6
I'm using ordinary adsl IPV4 network, but I have installed gogoclient to make 
my connection to ipv6 network possible. Gogoclient uses vpn-like method to 
transit ipv4 network to ipv6 tunnnel(tunnel broker). By connecting to remote 
ipv4-to-ipv6 transition servers in Japan or Taiwan,I have an ipv6 address in 
east asia.Next, I set goagent to use ipv6 adresses of google(as apjp cannot 
utilise ipv6 of google, even by changing hosts file it is no avail).On speed, 
my speed is always what my bandwidth indicates(noticing that always, even 
during the traffic jam from 7pm-11pm, it is same, which is a mystery for me). 
Under two very different ISPs, this is the same case, always at full speed. And 
in this case, my safety is also guaranted by my data traversing one vpn(gogo 
ipv6-in-ipv4 tunnel)and then to a ssl connection of google's ipv6 adress.In 
fact, when I search in google I  would always be asked if I would like to 
change to google.tw. The speed isn't compromised by safety,is there a better 
solution than this? I suggest you to test this
gogoclient at http://www.gogo6.com/freenet6/tunnelbroker
try one of these four remote servers in East 
Asia:60.199.0.228,tb.ipv6.apol.com.tw
tb.ipv6.fetnet.net,203.74.21.89. 
You can find perhaps more than a hundred ipv6 address of google here 
https://ipv6-hosts.googlecode.com/hg/hosts.

Payment
I agree, come on, Jeroen.

Original comment by Tintinch...@gmail.com on 12 Mar 2013 at 11:54

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I find an interesting phenomenon of apjp with regard to speed by accident. 
I tried to download a 700mb file splitted into 5 parts from rarefiles.net, as 
it usually goes with such sharing sites, they regulate download restrictions to 
free users. Each IP can download only a part and have to wait 1 hour later to 
download another. I was in a café with a 4m adsl wifi of China unicom, 
rarefiles.net is blocked by gfw, so I use Jelastic to download in chrome 
browser. The speed is 140k/s. I didn't want to wait 1 hour to download another, 
so I use firefox for another part, set local ports of apjp from another 
jelastic app of the other account of mine differently, and download at the same 
time. Now two apjp at the same time were running and surprisingly, two 
apjp-jelastic are loading at the same speed, 140k/s,and together 
280k/s.However, the system resources are used up in this case, the task manager 
shows that I use 96-100% of cpu(my laptop is quite aged, 6 years old), the 
biggest monster is the windows kernel service "system". 
Two parts were downloaded and my laptop became hot as hell. As my two jelastic 
ips cannot download other parts in an hour, I set jelastic as a proxy for 
openshift, and use openshift ip to download the third part. It works, the speed 
diminishes to 110k/s,but I can bear it. Two apjps were running, but my cpu is 
occupied only 2-9% of its resource.
The moral is that tcp connection threads of one apjp is fixed, I wonder if you 
can update it to use more threads. This can affect greatly of speed, but only 
if it wouldn't use up CPU.

Original comment by Tintinch...@gmail.com on 12 Mar 2013 at 12:43

[GoogleCodeExporter]

To westmin...@gmail.com
These are what hdzone records of my ip when I am using gae-apjp under one 
google ip https://203.208.46.131/HTTP and one gae-app

http://www.hdzone.org 
IP: 74.125.185.20
上次訪問(last visiting time): 2013.3.11 21:21
現在時間是(now the time is): 21:21

IP: 74.125.185.22
上次訪問(last visiting time): 2013.3.11 21:23
現在時間是(now the time is): 21:23

IP: 74.125.185.23
上次訪問(last visiting time): 2013.3.11 21:28
現在時間是(now the time is): 21:28
 http://geoip.flagfox.net.

clearly gae changes its ip every several seconds.I think the reason you are not 
forced to logout this forum constantly is that you have preserved its cookie. 
http://geoip.flagfox.net shows the same ever changing ip.

About safety again. Generally, it seems that safety and speed were 
incompatible, as so many complaints of Tor and I2P show. Datas bouncing through 
several server nodes are always slower than direct connection. But due to 
Chinese twisted internet enviroment, Paas(faster)+Paas doesn't give me a slower 
speed than a single paas. Services seem to be also seriously compromised with 
too much sruples of security ,Tor's ruling out of showing flash and java 
contents kills most fun of internet. Most normal internet users of China have 
never published any sensitive contents on social websites, the most sensitive 
contents are at present published on weibo(chinese tweeters) . So most of 
Chinese doesn't need so rigorous anonymity and safety like tor or even 
vpn-to-ssh-to-tor.As long as one is in china, there can be no strict internet 
anonymity if the authority wants to pin you down. We cannot prevent ourselves 
from using chinese mobile phone,wechat, qq,internet bank,Alipay.....GFW is a 
technologically accomplished project. I believe it can block all cloud services 
that apjp may utilize or make the connection excruciatingly slow , as http 
request from google to find appspot is already blocked and iranians situations 
with regard to tor show. The only reason that it hasn't done its best is that 
it knows most chinese didn't do big things out of the wall and block completely 
of google will be too scandalous.A tool like apjp at present that requires a 
user quite much patience to work will never attract notice of administrators of 
GFW, but the reason that cloudbees were blocked might due to its too easy steps 
to setup a proxy. As long as one's body is in china,the government always has 
means to find who you are, it depends on only whether they have noticed 
you.Read this http://www.yunsec.net/a/security/wlgf/2012/0727/10858.html. 

Original comment by Tintinch...@gmail.com on 12 Mar 2013 at 2:31

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I do not know about a paying service, I do not think a lot of people (if any) 
would pay for APJP.
If people pay for APJP and GFW blocks APJP, what would I do? Repay those 
people? I do not live in China so I cannot test GFW, and I cannot help people 
in Chinese.

Yes, APJP can be better, if I have enough time and resources (for example: I 
cannot make APJP for IOS because I do not have an IPHONE, ..)

Original comment by jeroen.v...@gmail.com on 13 Mar 2013 at 10:39

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

IP changing
u r right. I "have tested" that's a long time ago. I use other PaaS but GAE, so 
don't have that problem.

Business
There are 500+ million internet users in China, and 60%+ use smart phone. 
Assume that 1% know your proxy service, and in which 1% will pay for 100￥ 
(20$) per year, that's 5,000,000￥ (1,000,000$). As the precondition that your 
proxy tool is easy enough to use with just an exe file or smart phone apps, 
appid and password. The most widely used IM tool is QQ (second Skype ). You can 
search more information about GFW via Google or wikipedia.

Original comment by westmin...@gmail.com on 13 Mar 2013 at 3:38

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Hi,Jeroen.
Free or not, apjp has changed greatly my experience of internet. I just wish 
apjp could be better.
From these two sites you can test if a site is blocked in China.
http://www.websitepulse.com/help/testtools.china-test.html
http://www.greatfirewallofchina.org/

In the attachment is the .pac file of goagent. You can see a non-exhaustive 
list of sites blocked by GFW.

I think if GAE can be updated to function as proxy for other paas,two features 
need to be further implemented into APJP-GAE for better circumventing gfw.

First- support of IPV6 address.
The reason is that although most people(chinese or not)use ipv4 network,there 
are several free tunnel brokers that are available, and it wouldn't be too hard 
to set up a tunnel broker server inside china.(and I think it is totally legal).

Second- support of multiple ips.
443 port of ip address of https://google.** (except 203.208.46.13*)will be 
blocked by GFW for a few minutes after one connect to it for 20 minutes.It is a 
policy that GFW have been using with regard to google for about 15 months. (I'm 
not very sure of the accurate date).In this way, Chinese users often have the 
wrong impression that google's service is not good enough. So goagent uses 
multiple ips to connect to google. In goagent's console, it shows that it 
connects to 4 ips at the same time and if there's no response from these 4 ips, 
it changes to the next 4 ips until there is response. Goagent also can do it 
for ipv6 address.

The second file in the attachment is my goagent's configuration file, you can 
see that it supports multiple ips of ipv4 and ip6.

I think a gae-based proxy, apjp or others , can be more intelligent and easy to 
use for Chinese by adding an additional little software. I mean a software that 
includes an exhaustive ip list of google at present, both ipv4 and ipv6, it can 
test their ping time, produce a ranking of from their ping time and add these 
fast google ips into the apjp_local.property.

Though I'm not sure if by using different row of multiple ips to connect to 
google then to my-appspot site one can download a large file. 

Anyway, apjp has done a great job in combining both speed and safety as a 
proxy. I just suggest several features that it can update that will better fit 
Chinese internet environment.(Maybe also other contries that use Chinese GFW 
based firewalls,such as Iran).

Original comment by Tintinch...@gmail.com on 13 Mar 2013 at 9:13

Attachments:

• proxy.pac
• proxy.ini

[GoogleCodeExporter]

PS:The ip range from 203.208.46.0 to 203.208.46.255 all belong to google and 
are located in Beijing. It will leave too much of a speed gap to not set up gae 
as proxy to other paas. Multiple support of Ipv4 addresses also will be 
wonderful.

Original comment by Tintinch...@gmail.com on 14 Mar 2013 at 1:13

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I have updated APJP_REMOTE_JAVA_APPENGINE (see 
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/zltcyty6sdidwbl/8Xsa4UiWaB).

In APJP_REMOTE.properties you configure:
- APJP_REMOTE_HTTP_SERVER_REQUEST_URL == http://../HTTP
- APJP_REMOTE_HTTPS_SERVER_REQUEST_URL == http://../HTTPS

In APJP_LOCAL.properties you configure:
- APJP_REMOTE_HTTP_SERVER_X_REQUEST_URL == 
http://application-id.appspot.com/HTTP2HTTP
- APJP_REMOTE_HTTPS_SERVER_X_REQUEST_URL == 
http://application-id.appspot.com/HTTPS2HTTPS

Now APJP_LOCAL is configured to send requests to http://../HTTP via 
http://application-id.appspot.com/HTTP2HTTP (and http://../HTTPS via 
http://application-id.appspot.com/HTTPS2HTTPS)

Can you test?

Original comment by jeroen.v...@gmail.com on 14 Mar 2013 at 10:31

[GoogleCodeExporter]

[deleted comment]

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Great. I'm excited to deploy the new update.Haven't had enough time to test all 
paas, the following is what I find.

As china has blocked direct connection to 
http://application-id.appspot.com/HTTP2HTTP, I use 
APJP_REMOTE_HTTP_SERVER_X_REQUEST_URL = https://a-google-china-located-ip 
/HTTP2HTTP, key=Host, Value=my-appid.appspot.com. I also compare this 
configuration's effect with connecting to APJP_REMOTE_HTTP_SERVER_X_REQUEST_URL 
= http://application-id.appspot.com/HTTP2HTTP  through a ssh-based http, seems 
there's no difference.

What a single gae or paas can do, this gae-paas can also do it, I have tested 
youtube,vimeo, download a long high-definition video from keepvid.com, there's 
no problem. 
My ip keeps constancy. 

With regard to downloading from file-sharing sites that single paas used to be 
able to do, I haven't succeeded with gae-paas.
I tried these three files: http://uploaded.net/file/5onqhwkp
http://depositfiles.com/files/rf7ll4dsm
http://ryushare.com/bea14da7467/InReaSe76.part1.rar.
I have attached report in apjp console when it fails to download. I have tried 
several other paas on downloading these files, didn't have time to take 
snapshot of their reports, but https://goolgeip/http2http return 500 and 
request/method="  "all shows.
I can use the updated apjp to watch videos on vk.com, I couldn't do it with 
using gae or gae-to-paas before.But fails to watch videos on purevid.com and 
mixturecloud.com. Check purevid.com/v/19159w1yzomnw345083/. Have also attach a 
report a jelastic failure to watch purevid in the attachment.

despite of these, great job.I never expect an update so soon.

Original comment by Tintinch...@gmail.com on 15 Mar 2013 at 1:30

Attachments:

• jelastic-ryushare.jpg
• [dotcloud-ryushare screen 1.jpg](https://storage.googleapis.com/google-code-attachments/apjp/issue-160/comment-34/dotcloud-ryushare screen 1.jpg)
• [dotclouds-ryushare screen 2.jpg](https://storage.googleapis.com/google-code-attachments/apjp/issue-160/comment-34/dotclouds-ryushare screen 2.jpg)
• openshift-ryushare.jpg
• openshift-uploaded.net.jpg
• depositfile-heroku.jpg
• jelastic-uploaded.net-.jpg
• jelastic-purevid.jpg

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Download from http://uptobox.com/dd3h8rqk24uh:

With GAE I can never get around the captcha code check, each time I type the 
right code it directs me to a new session of 60 seconds waiting to type again 
capcha code.

With the update http2http-Heroku I can get to the download link, but the 
downloading grinds to a halt at 32mb, the size of the restriction of GAE 
already mentioned. And at its download failure moment also pops up the "500 for 
url:https://googleip/HTTP2HTTP" for five times.

I report this example because it is the first time I find a gae based proxy can 
download from a filesharing site. Though the download stops at 32mb.

Original comment by Tintinch...@gmail.com on 15 Mar 2013 at 5:25

Attachments:

• heroku-uptobox.jpg

[GoogleCodeExporter]

This is a problem I cannot correct :(.

When you download a file from download sites like uploaded.net, you can only 
download the file once. When the file is >32MB, APJP_REMOTE_JAVA_APPENGINE 
returns a status 500, and APJP_LOCAL_JAVA will then download the file with a 
lot of downloads who are <32MB. But download sites like uploaded.net do not 
like that :(.

I think a good PAC will allow you to complete CAPTCHAs like 
http://www.google.com/recaptcha (if they are not blocked by GFW).

The restrictions of APPENGINE are too big, and the advantages of HTTP2HTTP and 
HTTPS2HTTPS too little, so the update will not be added to APJP.
Also configuring HTTP2HTTP and HTTPS2HTTPS would be too difficult for a lot of 
people.

Original comment by jeroen.v...@gmail.com on 15 Mar 2013 at 7:29

[GoogleCodeExporter]

I see, is it that filesharing sites require their file to be downloaded once 
for all and gae cannot spit it? Anyway, gae seems to have too many restrictions.
what about streaming site like purevid, it seems that the requested video url 
is quite different from sites say, youtube, there is also no way to get around 
this?
The capcha doesn't pose a problem for http2http.
I think configuration of HTTP(S)2HTTP(S) will not be difficult as long as there 
is good wiki instructions. But at present the advantage is too little.
Anyway, thanks for the (unofficial) update and your replies.

Original comment by Tintinch...@gmail.com on 15 Mar 2013 at 7:57

[GoogleCodeExporter]

Sorry, I don't understand software programming at all, but maybe blobstoreapi 
can make gae deal with large file? 
https://developers.google.com/appengine/docs/java/blobstore/overview
Also, is there someway to slice the requested file into multiple chunks for 
downloading, and then reconstructing them into one?

Original comment by Tintinch...@gmail.com on 15 Mar 2013 at 8:50

[GoogleCodeExporter]

The download site creates a session when you start downloading a file (after X 
seconds). When you stop downloading that file (for whatever reason), the 
download site destroys that session.
Without that session you cannot download.
Other sites also use sessions, but how, where and when is site dependent.

The restrictions are with the URL Fetch API, which downloads the files. The 
Blobstore API cannot help.
You can only use the APPENGINE API to download files, so you cannot reuse 
connections to download files :(.

Original comment by jeroen.v...@gmail.com on 15 Mar 2013 at 9:39

[GoogleCodeExporter]

：〔 I think openshift and cloudfoundry have much less restrictions than GAE. 
So is there a way to make, when download a file or watch a video...that 
requires a single session, the url fetch response to be not immediate 
transmitted to paas-gae-me, but first fetched and kept in paas, then gae asks 
the paas to load it? Though this reminds me a leech site. Or just let the 
paas,say openshift, fetch and keep and give a code to every 32mb data from a 
single session and delete this 32mb after a certain time, by this code the gae 
can fetch it and know to combine it with other 32mb files loaded from openshift.
Also, if i set up ten http2http gae apps all with the same remote server,say an 
openshift app, when openshift fetch a url, for example,230mb,can openshift be 
instructed to forward this request every gae-app to fetch 1/10 part of it 
simultaneously?

Original comment by Tintinch...@gmail.com on 15 Mar 2013 at 3:37

[GoogleCodeExporter]

No, that is not possible, the other PAAS also have restrictions (but less than 
APPENGINE).

Original comment by jeroen.v...@gmail.com on 16 Mar 2013 at 10:01