On Sat, 15 Apr 2000, Jeffrey B. Siegal wrote: > Oskar Sandberg wrote: > > Actually, the university problem can be solved by so called shy nodes. A shy > > node would not use the DataSource to autodiscover the any new nodes, and > > nodes > > passing DataReplies from shy nodes would always reset DataSource to > > themselves. > > This provides a security behind which node operators can contribute to the > > future Freenet but limit their node to talk to trusted nodes (and not have > > it's > > address sent accross the network, where a snooping enemy might see it), but > > it also provides a way for nodes that wish to talk to Freenet only through > > one > > or a couple of "gateways" to do so for speed reasons. > > Hmm. I see some problems here: > > 1. Most universities and ISPs are not going to run freenet gateways, due > in part to liability fear but primarily laziness and conservatism. > They'll run their mail servers and that's about it.
Well, then they can't very well whine about the bandwidth, can they? > 2. How to you get users to set up shy nodes, especially since shy nodes > will probably perform worse than regular nodes since they're forced to > talk to/through overloaded gateways? Most people will download the > standard freenet node and run it. Actually, I originally concieved them a security thing, because I want people to be able to run nodes without broadcasting their ip to the world. If the university gateway were fast enough, with a large enough store, then people would want to use it because it would have a good cache. > 3. This doesn't help locality much unless the gateways have huge > caches. You could have a thousand (or more) freenet nodes at a > university, and potentially millions on a large ISP. These should be > able to cache for each other without relying on an overloaded central > resource. Yeah, your right. Getting some sort of locality is a better idea. It is also an interesting problem, with all the ideas about ad-hoc wireless Freenet floating around... > 4. The gateways become single points of failure, both technically and > legally. Shutting down the gateway effectively erases all files stored > on the \nodes "behind it." You would use several though... > > _______________________________________________ > Freenet-dev mailing list > Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev -- Oskar Sandberg md98-osa at nada.kth.se #!/bin/perl -sp0777i<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<j]dsj $/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1 lK[d2%Sa2/d0$^Ixp"|dc`;s/\W//g;$_=pack('H*',/((..)*)$/) _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
