Ian Clarke wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > I don't think we necessarily have to prevent location swapping on > opennet nodes, the destination sampling approach seems pretty robust, > and as the network stabilizes, the number of location swaps should > decrease.
I don't think this matters either. A much bigger concern is that the network could end up largely split into two - very few "open" nodes talking to dark ones, and vice versa. For it to work, people who are open would also have to want to authenticate people who don't directly. A problem, in general, with this whole thing is that the incentives for connecting to people are too small. It is hard to convince people that they ought to go through the trouble of adding more then a neighbor or two, if the only reason is that it is healthy for the network (when they may not notice much difference themselves). When I first envisioned an applications of this type of Darknet, I thought of it much more in the context of a IM/file sharing application then Freenet. In such a system, people would have have motivation to add "buddies" (presense, being able to surf their share directly, etc) which they don't in Freenet... // oskar
