What will actually change for SSKs apart from the way they work internally?
Will the SSK-Generator just spit out new keys with another new ending like the
last time SSKs were changed internally, but everything will keep working the
same as usual, so same FCP-commands for retrieval and inserts and so on, just
with a few added optional parameters here and there?
Since I don't assume that backward compatibility will be kept forever, this
would be kinda important. If it amounts to a new key "version" and a few new
optional features, things won't be too bad and most old tools will support new
SSKs immediately. But if everything using SSKs has to be changed at some point
to use the new SSK version, a lot of stuff will break without return, and thats
never pretty.
Even if only the internal workings (and a few new features like different
sizes) change for external applications, this will mean another whole content
migration in the long run: All freesites will have to be migrated, chat users
will once again be torn into another different group (the ones using tools
based on PSKs, vs the ones using one of the old WoTs and the ones using
old-style stuff like Frost) and so on.
What exactly is the reason that SSKs are changed at all compared to the new
SSKs just being named differently and old SSKs being kept as they are? What is
the advantage here? The old SSKs work just fine for a lot of stuff and I
personally like old working stuff a lot more then new maybe "not so working
until all bugs are finally worked out" stuff which requires a complete content
migration in the long run. Just my opinion of course.
--- Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_...@web.de> schrieb am Mo, 19.11.2012:
Von: Arne Babenhauserheide <arne_...@web.de>
Betreff: Re: [freenet-dev] SSK compatibility for infocalypse - was: What is the
ideal size for SSKs?
An: "Matthew Toseland" <t...@amphibian.dyndns.org>
CC: devl@freenetproject.org
Datum: Montag, 19. November, 2012 09:11 Uhr
Am Sonntag, 18. November 2012, 21:01:02 schrieb Matthew Toseland:
> On Sunday 18 Nov 2012 02:58:55 you wrote:
> > Wait, we're not going to maintain backward compatibility with SSKs? That
> > doesn't seem wise...
>
> Current proposal in a nutshell:
> - Support existing SSKs for back compatibility.
> - New ECC-based PSKs, programmable, allowing all sorts of things including
> multi-writer SSKs for semi-moderated forums. - New SSKs a special case of
> PSKs.
> - Several block sizes: ~ 800B (fit an insert in one packet; ideal for e.g.
> FLIP real-time chat; store in SSK datastores); ~ 2KB (fill one old
> SSK-datastore slot; ideal for forums etc), ~ 32KB (fit in one CHK store
> slot; useful for forum maintenance etc, and more efficient than a separate
> CHK). No other block sizes as they'd be problematic storage-wise.
Nice!
Thanks for your summary!
Best wishes,
Arne
--
Konstruktive Kritik:
- http://draketo.de/licht/krude-ideen/konstruktive-kritik
-----Integrierter Anhang folgt-----
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
Devl@freenetproject.org
https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
