--- Tom Kaitchuck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: 
> On Monday 27 October 2003 09:58 pm, Toad wrote:
> > > It would use a lot of RAM, and if we implemented TUKs we would never have
> > > to request keys that did not exist in the first place. TUKs have other
> > > advantages too. IE: Frost would only need to make a very small fraction
> > > of the requests it does now.
> >
> > I don't see why TUKs, or even passive requests, would solve the problem
> > entirely. If a large fraction of our requests won't succeed no matter
> > what, that is going to have a significant effect on routing estimator
> > accuracy and on our ability to gauge whether routing is working
> 
> If we had TUKs why would we ever have a request fail for data other than:
> A. It really isn't in the network.
> or B. It used to be in the network and fell out.
>
> Frost can have each board on a SSK or 20 each with their own TUK. If the TUK 
> can be updated by any node that has the key, then all frost would have to do 
> is request the TUK. Then if that version was newer than what you have you can 
> request the new messages. There is no reason to try to guess keys and request 
> them. (The only thing I wonder about is if two node insert the same new key 
> at exactly the same time, and they cross paths, what would happen?)

If anyone(Frost user) can write to the TUK how is it better/different than a KSK?
Has your TUK idea changed?  I thought the idea was to allow more complicated signing 
policies for
groups of people.
 
> > (routingSuccessRatio) - this proposal gives a possible means to mitigate
> > that. And I rather think it is possible to implement it using relatively
> > little RAM, and to substantially reduce the RAM usage of other
> > subsystems. And finally, RAM is cheap...
> 
> OK, so maybe the overhead isn't huge. However there will be some and TUKs are 
> indisputably a good idea, and IMHO a much better solution.

The problem the way I understand it with frost is that it tries to use freenet as a 
dumb DHT to
build communication layer on top.  
You want "ACDC".
Someone advertises having "ACDC".
You tell him to give you "ACDC".
It's all done in a series of posts and requests, which isn't pretty, but works.  Seems 
to me that
it'll be frixed someday with more passive insert/requests.

Is this the main problem you're tring to solve, or is it just tons of lost CSKs?

__________________________________________________________________

Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - http://mail.yahoo.de
Logos und Klingelt�ne f�rs Handy bei http://sms.yahoo.de
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to