Re: [freenet-chat] How would * change Freenet's protocol?
Matthew Toseland <toad-EI5O+8PHWbJeeLb3ft/[email protected]> Tue, 29 Jun 2010 00:49:28 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.freenet.technical,gmane.network.freenet.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
--===============1640920455== Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1465487.nQMlJt0n3k"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit --nextPart1465487.nQMlJt0n3k Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Monday 28 June 2010 05:39:23 Tom Sparks wrote: > How would a Delay-tolerant network and a Mobile ad hoc network change fre= enet's protocol? This is really a question for the tech list. IMHO delay tolerant darknet is a potentially interesting area for Freenet. = This would involve sneakernet (exchanging USB keys), short range high bandw= idth transfers between mobile devices etc. It would be routed (allowing acc= ess to a wider range of data than what is on your direct friends' nodes). I= t would rely heavily on passive requests / subscriptions, as well as on req= uests being relayed over a period of days, whenever friends connect.. It wo= uld likely be rather slow, because each hop might take a day or more. It co= uld take advantage of fast links where they are available however (e.g. und= erground wifi). It would be deployable in places where the Internet is so l= ocked down that Freenet doesn't work. About half the devs think this is not= something Freenet should ever deal with because e.g. it would need larger = block sizes. But even if it is not Freenet it might reuse a lot of Freenet = code. And it would have to be darknet: Data is only exchanged between peopl= e who have been pre-established as Friends. That means it is not ad hoc. If= you are interested in ad hoc / opennet, have a look at Haggle, which essen= tially relies on mobile devices being able to broadcast requests for files = to everyone in the immediate vicinity, with some opportunistic forwarding i= irc. IMHO this is rather risky, which is why I suggest a delay tolerant dar= knet Freenet system might be possible. --nextPart1465487.nQMlJt0n3k Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEABEIAAYFAkwpNQgACgkQYUNbc3WUHYg52QCglEMKQq/gMK89xxWPgUu1FtLv /KwAoLfToIAgm/1qlRQYQKReBzyONJo7 =nt7I -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1465487.nQMlJt0n3k-- --===============1640920455== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline _______________________________________________ Tech mailing list [email protected] http://freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech --===============1640920455==--