> > I'm not entirely sure why this would need to be done outside of > Java... > Can't we already bind to an infinate number of IP addresses? If we > pick > IPaddress to bind to that aren't taken, such as 172.100.100.* we > should > be able to bind to those without an issue.
I agree with the rest of my post, and think that Hamachi-style functionality would be THE killer app, but I don't know what I was smoking when I wrote that part. Of course we would need some sort of .lib per-system to bind to IP addresses. It's trivial to do, and we're already using .libs for native acceleration. I think it's acceptable, considering if it's not there, or can't load, freenet still works, the Hamachi sharing just doesn't. Please consider it. I know implementing a VPN-style connection is a pain, but since we ALREADY have connections to those people that span NATs, it's not as hard as it otherwise would be. Doing so will ENSURE darknet is VERY popular- There are lots of Filesharing/IM apps- There aren't any OSS which do this (easily). -Colin > >> >> >> There are OSS apps that do this, it's just that it's difficult to >> set up >> as what you are doing is creating a VPN. That would be extremely >> difficult to do over Java. >> >> However, the idea of sharing services out to your darknet peers is >> possible, if it is sufficiently useful. Certainly exposing samba >> shares >> or other TCP-based services is possible (if they are allowed to >> localhost or LAN already). >> >> As far as UDP-based games go, isn't it always going to perform >> better to >> connect directly to the IP address of your friend? Admittedly you >> have >> to password the server, and find their IP address... I wonder if >> there's >> something in the idea of dyndns over freenet (as opposed to ARKs; >> make >> toad.freenet resolve via a local lookup of the ARK or the >> connection to >> toad's current IP address)... we could have the node insert (and >> keep up >> to date) lines for your darknet neighbours in hosts.txt. :) >> >> It would be possible to tunnel generically as with a VPN, and make it >> look like a LAN. However it would be very difficult (it would >> definitely >> require external non-java code, and on windows that would have to be >> nasty low level code probably requiring the DDK; on linux it might >> require >> loading the standard kernel VPN module), and it would be slower than >> direct connections. In exchange it solves all the authentication >> problems. >> >> Anyone have any more ideas for darknet value-add? >> >> On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 01:50:40PM -0400, Colin Davis wrote: >>> I think this is a Wonderful line of thinking. >>> Reward good behavior, rather than punishing bad. >>> >>> I think responding to Jabber commands would go a long way here- >>> It gives >>> people a Waste-like IM system, which is a great idea. >>> >>> >>> I don't think it's a killer-app, though. >>> >>> What would make Freenet a Killer App, and encourage a LOT of >>> installations, and encourage people to make peers is including >>> Hamachi-style functionality. http://www.hamachi.cc/ >>> >>> Essentially, since we already have a connection to them, let us >>> forward >>> OTHER types of traffic over it. >>> >>> I use iTunes, and so does my friend "Bob". Neither of us can play >>> each >>> other's shared library, since they are on different physical >>> LANs- What >>> Hamachi lets you do is instantly create a virtual network between >>> everyone's who's connected to one "Network Name". >>> >>> After you did this, you could play Multiplayer Games, do VOIP, etc.. >>> Essentially, make it so that you can piggy-back any other program >>> over >>> freenet's links. >>> >>> So for example, Freenet could create virtual IP addresses locally- >>> 192.168.135.X, where X is number of the friend in the darknet > connection... >>> >>> >>> So, for example, if I had 5 darknet friends- >>> >>> 1- SinnerG >>> 2- Aum >>> 3- Toad >>> 4- Sanity >>> 5- Hobx >>> >>> If I want to Open a Quake3 game with SinnerG, I could connect to >>> 192.168.135.1 >>> If I want to share files with Aum, I could go to smb:\\192.168.135.2 >>> If I want to ftp to Toad, I can open a ftp connection to >>> 192.168.135.3 >>> >>> Etc. >>> >>> Right now, there is NO OSS app that does this- But with the >>> infrastructure freenet has, it wouldn't be that hard to >>> implement, and >>> it would make people LOVE darknet connections, but ONLY to their >>> friends, not to people they don't know. >>> >>> >>> In other words- It's perfect. >>> >>> ;) >>> >>> -Colin >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Fri, Jun 30, 2006 at 01:47:01PM +0200, Oskar Sandberg wrote: >>>>> 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. >>>> >>>> In other words we need to figure out a system of incentives to >>>> make it >>>> extremely attractive, as well as easy, to add darknet peers. >>>> There is >>>> absolutely nothing wrong with incentivising the behaviours which >>>> will >>>> ensure the network's survival. We have to do this to some degree > in e.g. >>>> load balancing, this is no different. >>>> >>>> Here's my thoughts: >>>> >>>> 1. Opennet takes ages to bootstrap. It has constant connection >>>> churn. >>>> While this can be a strength, it can also be a weakness. Darknet > offers >>>> some level of stability. >>>> >>>> 2. We can provide some level of local "sharing". We can share > bookmarks, >>>> and possibly file indexes, with our direct peers. We can send text >>>> messages to them, or files; we can integrate with Jabber perhaps. >>>> >>>> 3. Significantly increased security. We can have a "trust levels" >>>> system. If you have enough true-darknet connections then locally >>>> generated requests can be limited to true-darknet connections. >>>> >>>> 4. More security: I believe it will be extremely difficult to > implement >>>> premix routing in any meaningful and safe way on opennet. >>>> Certainly it >>>> will require completely different structures. Both premix >>>> routing and >>>> swap enforcement *require* darknet AFAICS. >>>> >>>> 5. Preferential treatment. True darknet nodes will tend to have >>>> fewer >>>> connections and therefore more traffic can be handled from each >>>> connection. But we can go beyond this: While we should not misroute >>>> requests we have accepted to our darknet peers, there is nothing >>>> wrong >>>> with accepting more requests from them, if they want to send more >>>> requests. Load balancing will then adjust the input load >>>> accordingly >>>> (more darknet requests allowed, less opennet ones). >>>> >>>> Any other ways in which darknet is better, or means by which we can >>>> favour it without breaking opennet? >>>>> >>>>> 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). >>>> >>>> Yes. >>>>> >>>>> 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... >>>> >>>> Why can we not have Thaw share its index files with the adjacent > nodes? >>>> We could provide FCP support for local messaging. >>>>> >>>>> // oskar >>>> -- >>>> Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org >>>> Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ >>>> ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Devl mailing list >>> Devl at freenetproject.org >>> http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl >>> >> >> -- >> Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org >> Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ >> ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. >> >> > > -- > > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl at freenetproject.org > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
