On Friday 04 January 2008 18:55, Michael Rogers wrote: > Matthew Toseland wrote: > > Opennet nodes won't participate in premix routing. > > What happens if the darknet nodes don't form a connected subnetwork?
Presumably it will only work in darknet subnetworks. > > > Okay, so on the one hand, more requests per tunnel means easier tagging > > (noisier samples). On the other hand, less requests per tunnel means more > > tunnels and more predecessor samples (more samples). Hmm... I suppose finding > > the optimal number of requests per tunnel is a matter for simulation? Would > > it be hideously complicated? > > As always, the problem is making it realistic... we can do a simplified > simulation but it might not capture some relevant feature (like > daily/weekly uptime patterns, just as an example of something that's > likely to be relevant but hard to simulate realistically). :| > > > Well yeah but Frost IDs and splitfiles, and splitfiles and splitfiles, often > > are linked. So it's not easy. > > Absolutely - we'd probably need to rely on clients to make informed > choices (eg allow an arbitrary "batch ID" to be associated with each > request, and try to send requests with the same batch ID through the > same tunnel or set of tunnels, and requests with different batch IDs > through different tunnels). > > >> If the routes are random, two tunnels that pass through different > >> neighbours of X don't reveal any more information than two tunnels that > >> pass through the same neighbour of X: the probability of the tunnels > >> parting ways at X doesn't depend on whether X is the initiator. > > > > It doesn't? I had assumed they always parted ways at the beginning... hmmm. > > Can you elaborate a little? > > If each hop of each tunnel is chosen independently and randomly, then > once two tunnels reach X, the probability that their next hop is the > same doesn't depend on the route so far - so it's the same as the > probability of two tunnels that started at X having the same next hop. But it's fairly unlikely that two tunnels from Y both reached X, isn't it? > > Cheers, > Michael -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20080111/5e8617ed/attachment.pgp>
