Hi!
On 12:14 Wed 26 Oct , Eugen Leitl wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 10:54:00PM +0300, Andres wrote:
> > We can not force anyone to route packets they do not want to route.
> > Also, if addresses were hashes, then how would the nodes be grouped -
> > you cannot cahnge a hash to suit current groupnode.
>
> If addresses are locations, the only way to change address
> is to change location.
Maybe...
> Node ID and location anonymity (via mix networks) are one layer up.
I disagree. IPv4 NAT already does anonymisation on layer 3. Sure, it is not
onion encryption or geographically distributed. But overlay mix networks have
their own problems, like performance, exit node liability/harassment or the
entire network ending up blacklisted. I see no reason, why anonymisation
should not start on layer 3. Especially not, if we build it from scratch
anyway.
-Michi
_______________________________________________
Netsukuku mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.dyne.org/mailman/listinfo/netsukuku
