> > The entire Freenet mechanism depends upon the "path compression" effect
> > which you get when data is requested, however (as was pointed out the last
> > time this was suggested) with this mechanism this path compression would
> > not occur.
> Freenet does not rely on path compression. Path compression optimizes
> Freenet by making it closer to being fully connected.
Yes, and without this optimization Freenet *wouldn't be able to scale*.
I don't know how you define it, but that certainly fits my definition of
"depends upon".
> Inside the cluster
> it's fully connected anyway. Outside of the cluster, path compression
> happens between normal nodes and cluster gateways.
Er, so if all requests for information pass through a cluster gateway -
given that bandwidth is likely to be the scarce resource rather than
storage space, why have any of the other nodes in the first place? This
just creates a bottleneck.
So it scans all 64,000 or whatever ports on every possible IP address,
doing a DH key-exchange on each one? Hmmm, yeah, that will work!
> > I think that it will always be possible to "fish" for IP addresses
> > (ie. build up a list of Freenet nodes but not in any directed
> > manner), but the likelihood that for any given IP address it will be
> > possible to shut it down is slim. It would need to be on an ISP which is:
>
> Let's say you're the Chinese government instead. The chance of shutting
> down a Freenet node if you find one would be 100% if you decided that
> Freenet nodes were bad.
Oh really? So the Chinese government discovers that I am running a
Freenet node. What do they do? They might be able to shut down a node if
they happened to be fishing and catch an IP address within China, however
the vast majority of Freenet nodes will not be within China meaning that
even if they shut-down *every* Chinese Freenet node they would have no
significant effect on the network - meaning that there is little point in
them even trying.
> Except if you can't tie a user to an IP address, of course, but you can in
> many schemes. For instance if you keep logs of your DHCP transactions then
> it's not a big deal, even on cable.
Er, bypassing DHCP is a very easy measure to take if this is your concern.
Ian.
PGP signature
