Colin Davis wrote: > I've thought about this before, but it's difficult to do that in a way > that's both difficult to harvest lists of opennet users from, and not > having external requirements. > > You could arrange and find parters through IRC, but then it's trivial > for someone to /join that IRC channel and watch who's connecting, and > could be blocked by blocking IRC.. > > The best answer that I could come up with, was to post noderefs to > Freenet, NIM-style.. That would by in-band, so it wouldn't be any more > blockable than the rest of freenet.. It would still be harvestable, > though, and it would require you to connect with at least darknet user, > before Open-net could start.. > > Personally, I think that's a good requirement ;) > I'm leaving the how to get the 50 references out of the equation as it's a separate issue. As you mention, there are several possibilities there. I'm just looking for an approach that can work with a set of a few dozen nodes and don't want global knowledge. My understanding is that the proposed opennet won't have global knowledge, but IIRC, how the small world stuff is done is not covered in detail on the Wiki page.
I'm also not worried about whether the result is darknet or opennet. I figure if it can be done, then it'd help make the darknet style ref trading we try to have now hat's mostly hacked into a bad opennet by #freenet-refs, etc. to possibly have some of the properties that make it closer to the darknet topologically than it is now, even if it's really more like an opennet (it'd be somewhere in between in my thinking). To my mind, no automatic ref trading scheme can be a true darknet. Sorry if that last bit is confusing or hard to parse. Probably cramming too many ideas into one space. > David Sowder (Zothar) wrote: > >> I'm trying to resolve something in my mind about the small world model >> and how it relates to Freenet. My understanding has been that the >> relation was in Freenet node location distances and my assumption was >> that the swapping algorithm was intended to optimized the "small world >> model" of an arbitrary set of connections such that, in my mind, it >> would theoretically settle on all nodes having a small world >> distribution of peers: increasing numbers of peers as shorter distances >> from a given node. >> >> Toad has informed me on IRC a bit ago that the swapping algorithm does >> not make arbitrary interconnections achieve "small world", which leaves >> me with these questions: >> >> Is there more than one metric for which we are trying to achieve "small >> world"? If so, could that be confusing things for others as well? >> >> Can a given node and a list of potential peers be used to create a small >> world model, at least from the perspective of the given node? I assume >> this is somehow possible as I understand it that opennet will be doing this, >> >> Some of you may already know where I'm likely going with this. What can >> opennet built into fred do that a program like refbot.py couldn't do? >> Could refbot.py potentially say, add 50 peers and then remove (in an >> orderly fashion) all but 15 based on a small world location/distance >> distribution to achieve a small world model if say, all/most nodes were >> using this same algorithm? >>
