If u guys hav all the pieces of the puzzle togather then y not put it out in a simple package :-). Also Id like to kno if ther are/were plans to put the hidden service descriptors into a DHT .
On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 9:17 PM, intrigeri <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > hhhh xhdhx wrote (18 Dec 2010 15:25:01 GMT) : > > Im quite ignorant abt onioncat. > > It is worth reading about. It makes easy some things that would > otherwise be pretty hard. > > > How was user authentication done in the onioncat+mumble > > combination ?? > > During preliminary testing we purely relied on communicating the > hidden services names (that map to OnionCat IPv6 addresses) in a > properly authenticated manner. > Is the mapping handled de-centrally ? , pls correct me if im wrong . > > > Reading on mumble says its been optimised for low latency , does > > that explain the lag ? > > No idea. > > > Mumble has a client / server architecture so was the server run as a > > hidden service & the clients just spoke to the hidden service > > through tor ?? > > Nope: every client publishes a hidden service and has it mapped to an > OnionCat IPv6 address. Then they can talk to each other with no need > for a central server at all. > That makes more sense. > > > The torchat architecture seems decentralised to me as every > > participant is a hidden service himself & there is no single point > > of failure. Most voip clients hav a client/server model which im > > very keen to avoid. > > OnionCat + Mumble does not fall into this "most VoIP clients" > category. > > Bye, > -- > intrigeri <[email protected]> > | GnuPG key @ https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/intrigeri.asc > | OTR fingerprint @ > https://gaffer.ptitcanardnoir.org/intrigeri/otr-fingerprint.asc > | Did you exchange a walk on part in the war > | for a lead role in the cage? > *********************************************************************** > To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to [email protected] with > unsubscribe or-talk in the body. http://archives.seul.org/or/talk/ >
