Hi, "Alen Peacock" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> You are right regarding availability and coding, but in flŭd, where > nodes are free to choose trading partners based on locally observed > reliability, this is taken into account. However, at the time you choose partners, you haven't made any local observations yet, by definition. Or do you use other user's observations as recommendations, as in reputation systems? > Nodes who are actively participating in a backup network have a > self-interest in remaining connected (or reachable) /continuously/. In practice, it could be the case that you don't want to leave your machine on 24/7, though. Ideally, you'd like backup to somehow occur when the machine is on, but you'd prefer not to leave it on all day long "just" for the sake of backup. Now, I agree that this is hardly achievable in practice... > In flŭd, there is an extra incentive for remaining available; a node > which does not remain available consistently will have a very hard > time finding partners willing to trade storage and bandwidth > resources. Right, but this might impede liveliness in a practical, large-scale open deployment. FWIW, I also think that cooperative backup in closed networks, e.g., among a group of pals, is likely to be more easily deployed and perhaps more trustworthy as well. And if you choose backup peers in a close-enough time zone, each other's machine may be up at roughly the same time. ;-) Thanks, Ludovic. _______________________________________________ p2p-hackers mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zooko.com/mailman/listinfo/p2p-hackers
