>>>>> "IC" == Ian Clarke <ian at hawk.freenetproject.org> writes:
IC> Because people are reporting that their datastores tend to
IC> have one or two nodes to which almost all references are
IC> pointing to.
Me> See my explanation on chat.
IC> Thanks, I am familiar with how Freenet works.
Then you're aware of how elegantly it handles routing problems -- what
a great architecture! B-). I was more pointing out that it's a
statistics issue rather than having anything to do with the actual
network. It's not really a function of particular nodes being hostile
or big, it's just a natural part of the adaptation of the "adaptive
network."
As long as you keep introducing new addresses in (preferably through
an out-of-band mechanism), and let the node run for a while, the
routing table will eventually "settle." Adding in a number of good
addresses of permanent nodes to nodes.config seems to be the best way
to do this.
>> And the attack would be... what? That the node is providing
>> your node with valid data? That's an -attack-? Where does the
>> actually-doing-damage part come in?
IC> By resetting your datastore on every message, getting many
IC> people pointing to your node, and then shutting it down
This is only really a problem if a) you're not doing redundant caching
and b) the downstream nodes have -no- other addresses in them.
Using O.O.B. mechanisms to keep adding fresh addresses is crucial
here.
IC> and/or returning false KSKs etc.
Well, that's a problem with KSKs, not with having a highly-reffed
node.
~Mr. Bad
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mr. Bad <mr.bad at pigdog.org> | Pigdog Journal | http://pigdog.org/
"Your description of coffee is how you interpret Sex."
-- "Personality Quiz" chain letter
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
Devl at freenetproject.org
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
