On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 04:19:33PM -0500, Colin Davis wrote: > For the record- I still think that reducing the initial connection to > "IP:Port and Password", rather than having to exchange a noderef will > signing your friends up much easier, and make people more likely to use > the darknet ;)
Is it so hard to transfer a file? Don't most IM clients (unlike IRC) manage to get through firewalls somehow? Admittedly they have no security... > > -Colin > > > > Colin Davis wrote: > > Fair enough- > > > > > > I (mis)understood the problem as wanting to make it possible to add the > > connections without requiring file-transfers.. I didn't realize that you > > were trying to avoid having to download the binary from a central source. > > > > For that, I agree, burnable .zips, and .5-style distribution servlet > > pages are likely the best that can be done. > > > > -Colin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > NextGen$ wrote: > >> * Colin Davis <Colin at sq7.org> [2007-03-05 15:49:17]: > >> > >>> I'm sorry that I'm being dim- > >>> Could you please explain how the network topography is exposed? I'm sure > >>> you're right, I'm just missing it. > >> Well, your solution is about shortening the reference. I thought you were > >> trying to address the node installation/deployment problem without emu/the > >> mirroring system. > >> > >> NextGen$ > >> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> If we have two clients, A and B, who want to talk to one another.. Both > >>> are behind Firewalls.. > >>> > >>> * A calls up B, and tells him "Connect to me, at 11.22.33.44, password > >>> 'Bob is a super cool password'" > >>> > >>> * B Says sure, and clicks the "Connect to a new client" icon in Fred, > >>> enters the IP and Password. > >>> > >>> * B's machine starts sending Freenet packets to A, thus opening up a NAT > >>> hole to his machine through the UDP trick. > >>> > >>> * B then tells A "It's running! Add my computer back. Mine is > >>> 22.33.44.55, and the password is 'Donkeys are really cool, and I like > >>> the way they look' " > >>> > >>> * A adds B's IP and password, and starts sending freenet packets to B. > >>> * A's machine is now exposed, through the UDP trick. > >>> > >>> * B's packets, which he is still sending, get through. > >>> * A's packets get through to B. > >>> > >>> * Now that they're talking, they exchange signed keys (real noderefs), > >>> so next time, they don't need to do the passwords. > >>> > >>> * Fred disables the passwords. > >>> > >>> Nothing has required the use of a third party, other than the telephone > >>> call between the two of them to share the passwords. > >>> > >>> -Colin > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>>> When Side-A added the noderef of B, it would start sending out packets > >>>>> to B, knowing that they won't get returned.. But the Sending of these > >>>>> packets would open a NAT-hole.. > >>>>> Then, Side-B would get around to adding the noderef of A, and start > >>>>> sending packets to A, opening a NAT-hole on their own side.. Side A's > >>>>> packets then get in through this hole, just as B's now arrive at A. > >>>>> > >>>>> What am I missing? > >>>>> > >>>>> -Colin > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Tech mailing list > >>> Tech at freenetproject.org > >>> http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Tech mailing list > >> Tech at freenetproject.org > >> http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Tech mailing list > > Tech at freenetproject.org > > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech > > _______________________________________________ > Tech mailing list > Tech at freenetproject.org > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech > -------------- 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/20070305/d72a6c57/attachment.pgp>
