On Fri, Oct 14, 2005 at 10:06:56AM -0400, jrandom at i2p.net wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > > >Well, my stock answer is that I2P is harvestable, and this is the > > > >fundamental problem that we seek to rectify. > > > > > >Hrm, but for the reason's we've discussed over this epic thread, > > >your stock answer is not correct. I2P's restricted route topology > > >isn't something new, its been on the roadmap as I2P 2.0 for the > > >past 2 years. You need a new stock answer ;) > > > > I tried to find more info on your restricted routes approach, and > > from what I can gather, I2P would collapse if any more than a small > > subset of the network elected to use restricted routes. In contrast, > > Freenet 0.7 should happily deal with a case where 100% of the peers > > linked exclusively to trusted peers. > > > > As such, it is rather disingenuous to argue that I2P is not > > harvestable just because a small subset of the peers in the network > > can remain hidden, the vast majority of the peers in I2P will and > > indeed, must remain harvestable for the network to work. > > That is a neat characteristic, and that does help clarify Freenet's > position - that it is striving to offer a hidden network that will > operate on small to medium scales in countries disconnected from > the Internet, or in a post-apocolyptic world where there is no more > West.
Yep, it's *the* interesting characteristic really. I don't think 10% of the population of China having an illegal node (even after they are rich enough) is particularly plausible, but I don't see why there couldn't be a million node network, even if it was somewhat harassed. > > For everything else we've been discussing, I2P suffices, and > (arguably) performs better. But performance and efficiency is > something I'm sure we'll discuss more about later, as I know you > disagree. In any case, its 'cheaper', as it already exists, and > additional things that a censorship resistant content distribution > network needs could be provided by Freenet, simply reusing the > anonymous communication layer offered by I2P. > > Competition is fine, but cooperation better. This is true. I'm interested in your claims that you can route within the darknet (B); this seems somewhat similar to the problem we are solving. > > =jr -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20051014/f987ece1/attachment.pgp>
