On 29/03/14 15:26, adilson_lanpo@8AEGotJKXJ4ABJy1gKjls4SrrzpshQNoEMAbu0IFA94 wrote:
> On Sat, 29 Mar 2014 12:59:34 -0000 > toad-notrust@h2RzPS4fEzP0zU43GAfEgxqK2Y55~kEUNR01cWvYApI wrote: > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA256 >> >> On 29/03/14 09:21, >> adilson_lanpo@8AEGotJKXJ4ABJy1gKjls4SrrzpshQNoEMAbu0IFA94 wrote: >>> There's also a good chance that computing power to run nodes >>> may well be more expensive than the fee to join freenet >>> (especially if it as low as $5 as proposed in the OP). >> I very much doubt that this is the case. Computing power - CPU, >> bandwidth, CAPTCHAs, IP addresses, geeks, etc - have significant >> economies of scale, and are very cheap in bulk. Whereas the >> costs scale linearly if you have a pay-per-join scheme. > Of course that pay to join fee only needs to be paid once while > bandwidth and electricity is a recurring expense (admittedly ones > that will decline in cost over time as lines get upgraded and > computers get more efficient). > > For running 10,000 nodes (order of magnitude of current opennet) > would thus only cost $50,000 under a $5 to join fee system, petty > cash for basically any intelligence agency or even many medium > sized companies and organized crime can surely steal that if they > want to attack us for some reason. It's within the budget of some university research projects even, depending on what they hope to get out of it (e.g. there is some really expensive equipment). But the big questions are: 1) Is the cost per node greater than $5 (or what we could plausibly ask of new users)? 2) Do you need that many nodes? Can you just MAST? (See my other mail) >> Seriously, how many nodes can you run on one system? Especially >> if you can centralise the datastores and so on. And how much does >> it cost to buy *one* remote server with 1TB/mo transfer? >> Computing power is *very* cheap. Very much cheaper than a $5 per >> join fee for opennet IMHO, but if you want to look into the >> numbers then please do. > You could probably fit a few nodes on a multi-GHz core but will > need some serious memory, say a half a Gig for each node (assuming > a minimal Linux VM for each node), if we go with a 4 core system > and 3 minimal nodes on each core that is 6 GiB RAM, that's > something like a pretty normal desktop system today. Have you tried it? What you need for a node with WoT and Sone and downloads is not the same as what you need for a node that's just routing, and our CPU usage for just routing is relatively low. Also there's some duplication. And on the subject of economies of scale, if you have more nodes, you can 1) hire geeks to improve performance and 2) have a large shared datastore across many nodes. Also, you don't need a VM for each node. You can quite happily run them all on the same system image, even all in the same VM (which makes sharing a datastore easier). And memory is cheap. My suspicion is with a little coding you could probably run 100 nodes on one reasonably fast system, or a handful of them. Which is enough to connect to every node on opennet right now. Sadly I don't have time (or bandwidth) to try this, but if somebody wants to try that'd be a good thing. > For 12 nodes I'm pretty sure it'll cost more than $5 per virtual > node (can you buy quad core desktops for $60?). You can buy a reasonable server with 1TB/mo transfer for $70/mo IIRC, but I don't recall where. Anyone? Of course they will prohibit p2p, but whether they enforce this is less clear. And then there's connectivity - I mentioned the cost of unique IP addresses in my other mail. Partly it's a question of attacker modeling - do you want to constantly monitor everyone forever? Do you want to avoid getting caught at all costs? Do you know somebody's going to insert something sensitive soon (say this month) and you just want to catch them? Or if they will insert it in the very near future you could certainly use a botnet - how long do they last anyway on average? > Using a bunch of R.Pi or similar may reduce costs though you won't > be able to run as many nodes on them. It's probably more efficient to use "big" systems. > Being able to fit more nodes on a core may help reduce costs, > though memory usage is then going to become your bottleneck. Memory is pretty cheap. I'd be very interested in any serious estimates as to cost.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
