|
"The problem with this is that it
doesn't really work. For the sake of
argument, lets say that the time it takes your node to return some data is T, and the time it would take it to get it from the next node is T + 100. Right now if we return is less than T+100, they can tell it came from us. If you add another 100 delay in there, then they can still tell it came from you, because if it came from another node, it would have delayed too. So if you return in less than T + 200 they know it came from you." I'm not quite following this. I was aware of the problem
you describe, but according to me, this is the case if you set fixed time-delays
at each node.
What I suggested was adding the time that a node estimates
it would take if it had to get it from the next node it estimates as the
best candidate. Since that would differ from node to
node, the time would be a variable to begin with. So if it returned it in less
then T + 200, they wouldn't know a thing, unless they also knew what the
best-estimator was for that node towards restrieving it from another
node.
Because, if the time-delay isn't fixed, but dependable on
the estimate the node has for requesting it further, then the analysis you
describe above is fruitless (at least, to determine with certainty that it
wasn't there before).
I dunno, maybe I'm missing
something.
|
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
