Send Devl mailing list submissions to
devl at freenetproject.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://www.uprizer.com/mailman/listinfo/devl
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
devl-request at freenetproject.org
You can reach the person managing the list at
devl-admin at freenetproject.org
When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Devl digest..."
Today's Topics:
1. Re: List gone quiet (Tavin Cole)
2. Re: Announcement Protocol (Ruediger Kapitza)
3. Re: Announcement Protocol (Ruediger Kapitza)
4. a web of trust for nodes?? (was: Announcement Protocol) (Tavin Cole)
5. Re: List gone quiet (Tavin Cole)
6. Re: Simulations... (Sebastian Spaeth)
7. Re: a web of trust for nodes?? (was: Announcement Protocol) (Oskar
Sandberg)
8. Re: Killing Freenet (Re: [freenet-devl] Aardvark) (Oskar Sandberg)
9. Re: Killing Freenet (Re: [freenet-devl] Aardvark) (Oskar Sandberg)
10. Re: Killing Freenet (Re: [freenet-devl] Aardvark) (Oskar Sandberg)
11. Re: Killing Freenet (Re: [freenet-devl] Aardvark) (Peter Todd)
12. Re: Aardvark (Chris Anderson)
13. Announcement Protocol (Chris Anderson)
--__--__--
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 01:44:37 -0500
From: Tavin Cole <[email protected]>
To: devl at freenetproject.org
Subject: Re: [freenet-devl] List gone quiet
Reply-To: devl at freenetproject.org
Because filtering won't work! That bug has already been reported.
On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 07:12:56PM -0800, Dev Random wrote:
> Hey, why don't we turn the filter on? I haven't heard a bug report in ages.
>
> On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 05:29:35PM -0800, Mr.Bad wrote:
> > >>>>> "IC" == Ian Clarke <lists at octayne.com> writes:
> >
> > IC> Mr. Bad - are there any outstanding issues before we release
> > IC> 0.3.7? If not, we should release. You are welcome to do the
> > IC> honours, but I am happy to do it if not.
> >
> > Only the Aardvark link on the gateway page, and I'll check that
> > later.
> >
> > I'll release tonight.
> >
> > ~Mr. Bad
> >
> > --
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> > /\____/\ Mr. Bad <mr.bad at pigdog.org>
> > \ / Pigdog Journal | http://pigdog.org/ | *Stay*Real*Bad*
> > | (X \x)
> > ( ((**) "If it's not bad, don't do it.
> > \ <vvv> If it's not crazy, don't say it." - Ben Franklin
> > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Devl mailing list
> > Devl at freenetproject.org
> > http://www.uprizer.com/mailman/listinfo/devl
>
> --
> Dev Random
> Fingerprint: 3ABC FCEF 1BCE 4528 E4FD 15EB 173A 76D2 6959 DAF1
--
// Tavin Cole
--__--__--
Message: 2
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 11:17:39 +0100 (CET)
From: Ruediger Kapitza <[email protected]>
To: devl at freenetproject.org
Subject: Re: [freenet-devl] Announcement Protocol
Reply-To: devl at freenetproject.org
On Fri, 2 Feb 2001, Scott G. Miller wrote:
> > Okay this is just a guess: If I was Alice I could ask some of my trusted
> > nodes or only one (if its the node of my best friend) to give me some
> > addresses) with their PK. (Is this possible?)
> >
> > Then they will immediately reply with a bunch of NodeRefs from their
> > Datastore. Now I would pick some of them and attach them to my
> > AnnouncementRequest. This means Alice decides which route the announcement
> > goes. First attached address first node, second address second node ...
>
> Thats not a good idea. You don't want any specific node to control the
> keyspace assigned to Alice. More importantly, the entire point is to
> create random links in the network when adding a new node. Simulations
> show this as increasing the reliability of Freenet routing by 20-30% over
> inform. Allowing Alice to choose nodes already close to her trusted
> friends would be equal or worse than inform.
Why should Bob control the keyspace if he gives me some some addresses.
I thought this depends on some random numbers of hashes form all the nodes
which are influenced by the announcement.
The second point is true.
This leaves still the point that Bob2 can choose the route if he knowes
some nodes which belong like him to an evil party. Is this really a
problem? Why not? What happens if Alice has 30 node addresses and 29 are
from some kind of evil party?
--__--__--
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 10:58:51 +0100 (CET)
From: Ruediger Kapitza <[email protected]>
To: devl at freenetproject.org
Subject: Re: [freenet-devl] Announcement Protocol
Reply-To: devl at freenetproject.org
On Sat, 3 Feb 2001, Oskar Sandberg wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 08:01:32PM +0100, Ruediger Kapitza wrote:
> She has no more reason to trust the nodes she got from Bob's store than
> the node he sends it to. Freenet does not have a node trust system,
> trying to pretend it does will not solve the problems caused by that.
I thought we have to trust Bob the node form some out of band anyway so we
would be completely fucked up. So there is no problems with getting more
addresses form Bob. For me the point was that Bob2 has not that high
influence on the rest of the route. Yes no other node apart Bob is trusted
more or less than other but they can't cheat and route the request form
Alice to the party of evil nodes.
> Besides, the point is that Alice is does not decide where the announcement
> goes. And this misses the important role of the introduction as routing
> space harmonizer, the nodes she get's from Bob1 would be effected by the
> part of the keyspace he is biased toward, which may not be close to the
> established value.
This is the point were I have no chance anymore since Scott says something
similar and you are the gurus. I thought that it would maybe enough to
give it a start with two trusted nodes and basta. Okay got it :-)
> And your showing the list of nodes to all the nodes,
> not just Alice. I could go on...
No prob with that. (??/ If I would be wise I would know.)
Of course you could kill this if Alice crypt the next ref with the PK of
the node which has to decide and so one.
--__--__--
Message: 4
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 06:08:12 -0500
From: Tavin Cole <[email protected]>
To: devl at freenetproject.org
Subject: [freenet-devl] a web of trust for nodes?? (was: Announcement Protocol)
Reply-To: devl at freenetproject.org
On the note of the purely speculative here (and we can move this to tech@
if necessary), what if there were a web of trust for Freenet nodes?
The only discussion like this I have seen so far is the one about having
hand-written trusted nodes lists.. have any other approaches ever been
considered? (I agree that the hand-written trust lists are suboptimal)
So, if there *were* a nodes' web of trust, supported directly in Fred,
that did not have to be maintained by a hand-written nodes.config thingie,
what might it be like? Let me stave off any flames by opining that this
might be a nifty spinoff of Freenet for specialized groups that wish
to run private Freenets, rather than ever being part of Freenet proper.
There would be some mechanism for nodes signing other nodes' public keys,
and propagating this info through the network. There'd be a way to
revoke trust in a node and communicate that to other nodes.
Such a system might be too fragile.. I dunno, I'm virtually hallucinating
from being up all night coding..
--
// Tavin Cole
--__--__--
Message: 5
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 06:17:56 -0500
From: Tavin Cole <[email protected]>
To: devl at freenetproject.org
Subject: Re: [freenet-devl] List gone quiet
Reply-To: devl at freenetproject.org
On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 11:39:43PM -0800, Mr . Bad wrote:
> >>>>> "TC" == Tavin Cole <tavin at mailandnews.com> writes:
>
> TC> Because filtering won't work! That bug has already been
> TC> reported.
>
> Hey, cut the guy some slack. He worked pretty hard on the filtering,
> at the behest of the people on this list.
>
> Acting like the entire idea was retarded from the start is kinda
> cruel.
>
> ~Mr. Bad
My apologies, that did sound bad. I meant no offense to the quality of his
work. I just feel he's taken on an intrinsically impossible task. All the
more accolades to him for facing up to a difficult problem.
Well, I don't want to rekindle the filter/blocker war. I think both sides
are pretty well understood. But it was agreed that the filter would be
disabled in 0.3.7.
pax
--
// Tavin Cole
--__--__--
Message: 6
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2001 13:01:15 +0100
From: Sebastian Spaeth <[email protected]>
Organization: University of =?iso-8859-1?Q?Link=F6ping?=
To: devl at freenetproject.org
Subject: [freenet-devl] Re: Simulations...
Reply-To: devl at freenetproject.org
Ian Clarke wrote:
> Simulations suggest it is not a problem with the current architecture
> (although simulations are rarely 100% accurate).
I have to admit that I am quite suspicious about the ability of
Simulations since I took a course covering exactly that topic at
University. They do have their use, but conducting and designing
simulations where we have that many unknown variables that can/will
influence Freenet reliability will lead to *very* inaccurate results.
Unknown variables (e.g. the statistical distributions) that cannot be
found out or used correctly in simulations, but will influence
routing/reliability, might be:
- up/downtime of Freenet nodes which will depend on the future user base
(modem, cable, Windows/Linux,...)
- connection speed of Freenet nodes depends on user base as well
- size of disk space dedicated to Freenet nodes (will people spend 10MB
or 1GB to Freenet)
- user behavior (will people split up big files into 1000 file chunks or
insert them as big files (might be determinated by popular client
bahavior)
- percentage of transient vs. nontransient nodes
How are these factors considered in the current simulations, if at all?
Sebastian
--__--__--
Message: 7
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 15:25:14 +0100
From: Oskar Sandberg <[email protected]>
To: devl at freenetproject.org
Subject: Re: [freenet-devl] a web of trust for nodes?? (was: Announcement
Protocol)
Reply-To: devl at freenetproject.org
On Sat, Feb 03, 2001 at 06:08:12AM -0500, Tavin Cole wrote:
> On the note of the purely speculative here (and we can move this to tech@
> if necessary), what if there were a web of trust for Freenet nodes?
> The only discussion like this I have seen so far is the one about having
> hand-written trusted nodes lists.. have any other approaches ever been
> considered? (I agree that the hand-written trust lists are suboptimal)
The we would be opening a can of worms. Besides the obvious points about
the difficulty of making such a thing work (who do you trust? how do you
trust? what is trust? what are you trying to protect?) we really don't
know anything about whether it is possible to use the Freenet system
in a constrained connectivity situation.
<>
> Such a system might be too fragile.. I dunno, I'm virtually hallucinating
> from being up all night coding..
>
> --
>
> // Tavin Cole
>
> _______________________________________________
> Devl mailing list
> Devl at freenetproject.org
> http://www.uprizer.com/mailman/listinfo/devl
--
'DeCSS would be fine. Where is it?'
'Here,' Montag touched his head.
'Ah,' Granger smiled and nodded.
Oskar Sandberg
md98-osa at nada.kth.se
--__--__--
Message: 8
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 15:35:34 +0100
From: Oskar Sandberg <[email protected]>
To: devl at freenetproject.org
Subject: Re: Killing Freenet (Re: [freenet-devl] Aardvark)
Reply-To: devl at freenetproject.org
On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 06:40:44PM -0800, Mr.Bad wrote:
> >>>>> "OS" == Oskar Sandberg <md98-osa at nada.kth.se> writes:
>
> OS> I'm quite aware of the fact that the network is not working
> OS> very well, and I'm quite pesimistic about whether it ever
> OS> will
>
> Really? Do you think there's anything fundamentally wrong with the
> architecture? Or do you think it's just a matter of the current set of
> nodes?
Honestly, both.
> OS> but there is really no point in being here at all if not
> OS> operating under the assumption that we will get it to work
> OS> some time...
>
> You're absolutely right! That's why it's probably good to try and keep
> a positive attitude and open communications.
And for people who talk to try to have a clue what they are talking
about...
>
> ~Mr. Bad
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> /\____/\ Mr. Bad <mr.bad at pigdog.org>
> \ / Pigdog Journal | http://pigdog.org/ | *Stay*Real*Bad*
> | (X \x)
> ( ((**) "If it's not bad, don't do it.
> \ <vvv> If it's not crazy, don't say it." - Ben Franklin
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> _______________________________________________
> Devl mailing list
> Devl at freenetproject.org
> http://www.uprizer.com/mailman/listinfo/devl
--
'DeCSS would be fine. Where is it?'
'Here,' Montag touched his head.
'Ah,' Granger smiled and nodded.
Oskar Sandberg
md98-osa at nada.kth.se
--__--__--
Message: 9
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 15:40:03 +0100
From: Oskar Sandberg <[email protected]>
To: devl at freenetproject.org
Subject: Re: Killing Freenet (Re: [freenet-devl] Aardvark)
Reply-To: devl at freenetproject.org
On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 06:43:42PM -0800, Ian Clarke wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 03, 2001 at 03:15:43AM +0100, Oskar Sandberg wrote:
> > I'm quite aware of the fact that the network is not working very well, and
> > I'm quite pesimistic about whether it ever will, but there is really no
> > point in being here at all if not operating under the assumption that we
> > will get it to work some time...
>
> It is annoying, simulations indicate that a network should have about
> 98% reliability and search-times of under 10 hops. Having said that,
> data can still be requested, and the most serious problem I noticed
> recently was that Aardvark was down - and that wasn't Freenet's fault.
It's possible that it is Freenet's fault, the Aardvark person may have
been inserting so much with the daily updates (if that is what he was
doing) that he burned all the routes from his node. At least that is
something I believe we can fix.
The real world is never like a simulation, and on the whole what I have
seen seems to indicate a rather unstable situation, where even a small
offset in certain issues can upset the results greatly.
> According to www.octayne.com, there are 100 working Freenet nodes at
> least (undoubtedly many more since the limit is 100 nodes).
>
> Someone was doing some experiments on Freenet's reliability over time -
> did anything come of that?
>
> Ian.
--
'DeCSS would be fine. Where is it?'
'Here,' Montag touched his head.
'Ah,' Granger smiled and nodded.
Oskar Sandberg
md98-osa at nada.kth.se
--__--__--
Message: 10
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 15:45:13 +0100
From: Oskar Sandberg <[email protected]>
To: devl at freenetproject.org
Subject: Re: Killing Freenet (Re: [freenet-devl] Aardvark)
Reply-To: devl at freenetproject.org
On Fri, Feb 02, 2001 at 11:01:36PM -0500, Peter Todd wrote:
> On Fri, 02 Feb 2001, you wrote:
> > According to www.octayne.com, there are 100 working Freenet nodes at
> > least (undoubtedly many more since the limit is 100 nodes).
>
> How many of those Freenet nodes are *really* working? Far, far lower
> I suspect given that my node, which does get well established in the
> network, rarely has references to more then 3 nodes at a time. Even
> if I force a load of a pile of references through nodes.config it
> takes only an hour or two before it weeds out %95 of the nodes.
It would be interesting to see what the exception that causes the removal
is. Are we failing to connect (maybe we need to increase the connect
timeout, our arbitrary cutoff after 5 seconds when I believe the TCP says
two minutes is somewhat shaky), are we failing to get responses back
from nodes we send to, or is the authentication not working, or what?
--
'DeCSS would be fine. Where is it?'
'Here,' Montag touched his head.
'Ah,' Granger smiled and nodded.
Oskar Sandberg
md98-osa at nada.kth.se
--__--__--
Message: 11
From: Peter Todd <[email protected]>
To: devl at freenetproject.org
Subject: Re: Killing Freenet (Re: [freenet-devl] Aardvark)
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 09:47:50 -0500
Reply-To: devl at freenetproject.org
On Sat, 03 Feb 2001, you wrote:
> > How many of those Freenet nodes are *really* working? Far, far lower
> > I suspect given that my node, which does get well established in the
> > network, rarely has references to more then 3 nodes at a time. Even
> > if I force a load of a pile of references through nodes.config it
> > takes only an hour or two before it weeds out %95 of the nodes.
>
> It would be interesting to see what the exception that causes the removal
> is. Are we failing to connect (maybe we need to increase the connect
> timeout, our arbitrary cutoff after 5 seconds when I believe the TCP says
> two minutes is somewhat shaky), are we failing to get responses back
> from nodes we send to, or is the authentication not working, or what?
Is it actually 5 seconds? The default is 2000 miliseconds, 2 seconds
right? Anyway I just set my timeout on my node to 5000 miliseconds to
see what will happen.
What can cause a TCP connect timeout anyway? Failure for the node at
the other end to connect() the connection? In which case overloaded
nodes will get connect timeouts while less used nodes won't?
--
retep at penguinpowered.com http://retep.tripod.com
--__--__--
Message: 12
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 10:08:14 -0500 (EST)
From: Chris Anderson <[email protected]>
To: devl at freenetproject.org
Subject: Re: [freenet-devl] Aardvark
Reply-To: devl at freenetproject.org
On Fri, 2 Feb 2001, Scott G. Miller wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 01, 2001 at 05:29:11PM -0500, Peter Todd wrote:
>
> > And finally I've had one of my keys, KSK at robots.txt, overwritten
> > by someone else. Though the key should soon drop out with the new
> > special-case of robots.txt in fproxy.
>
> Your absolutely correct and are in fact backing up my position. I
> was just clarifying the point, but I entirely agree. KSKs are bad.
> *Baaaad*. When you're about to use a KSK, ask yourself three
> questions:
>
> 1) Do I need a KSK?
> 2) Really?
> 3) Repeat question 1
If KSK's are so evil as to give the impression that they are a stable
way of adding content to freenet, why not change their behavior...
Instead of propagating the old KSK value when a collision happens,
propagate the new value. For example, if I insert my KSK at robots.txt,
it will overwrite any robots.txt that already exists instead of
propagating the existing one.
--__--__--
Message: 13
Date: Sat, 3 Feb 2001 10:08:56 -0500 (EST)
From: Chris Anderson <[email protected]>
To: devl at freenetproject.org
Subject: [freenet-devl] Announcement Protocol
Reply-To: devl at freenetproject.org
On Sat, 3 Feb 2001, Ruediger Kapitza wrote:
> > On Fri, 2 Feb 2001, Scott G. Miller wrote:
> >
> > Thats not a good idea. You don't want any specific node to
> > control the keyspace assigned to Alice. More importantly, the
> > entire point is to create random links in the network when adding
> > a new node. Simulations show this as increasing the reliability
> > of Freenet routing by 20-30% over inform. Allowing Alice to
> > choose nodes already close to her trusted friends would be equal
> > or worse than inform.
Hmm. The 20-30% number is interesting, how did you arrive at that?
>
> Why should Bob control the keyspace if he gives me some some
> addresses. I thought this depends on some random numbers of hashes
> form all the nodes which are influenced by the announcement.
>
> The second point is true.
>
> This leaves still the point that Bob2 can choose the route if he
> knowes some nodes which belong like him to an evil party. Is this
> really a problem? Why not? What happens if Alice has 30 node
> addresses and 29 are from some kind of evil party?
I don't see the difference between Alice choosing the routes and
Bob1..BobN choosing the routes. Anyway, can't Alice do this with the
proposed protocol by setting the htl of the Announcement to 1 and
messaging Bob2..BobN herself? It seems that this is a Freenet
crawling protocol. I do thing that the inform mechanism is producing
a loosely connected network and should be replaced.
--__--__--
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
Devl at freenetproject.org
http://www.uprizer.com/mailman/listinfo/devl
End of Devl Digest
