On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, Kevin Atkinson wrote: God, I made a lot of typos, even for me. Oh well, hopefully you can still read it. I will repost a corrected version after I get some feedback.
> > NOTE: I am posting this to freenet-tech in order to get some > constructive criticism and general ideas. Please do not flame me as I > will simply ignore you. > > I really like the general idea behind freenet, however I believe > Freenet is overly concerned about anonymity. Therefore, unless some > one talks me out of it, I am strongly considering starting my own > project called DistribNet which will be similar to Freenet but > different in a number of key areas. > > *** Comparison to Freenet > > *) Focus more on speed and scalability than anonymity. The goal of > DistribNet is to be as fast or faster than the Web for any sort of > pages with reasonable popularity. > > *) No fancy datastore. Use the file system for storing keys. No > attempt to disguise what is in one owns datastore. Nothing is > encrypted by default. > > *) By default no attempt will be made to prevent other nodes from > knowing what's in another nodes datastore. > > *) Data, by default, will go directly from one node to another instead > of having to be routed through other nodes. > > Please not the "by default" part. The eventual goal support the same > level of anonymity that freenet offers, but that is not DistribNet > primary focus. > > However, DistribNet will be the same as freenet in several key areas. > > *) Will allow anyone to anonymously post content to the network > > *) Completely decentralized > > *) Content will be stored in a similar fashion that data is stored in > Freenet. That is popular content will be > > In addition DistribNet will deffer by freenet as it is now with: > > *) The ability for one to share content that is one one's hard drive > or be able to fetch content from the Web or other networks when it > is more effect to do so. > > *) Searching and support for "updateable" keys will be build into the > protocol from the beginning. The searching faculty will be > designed in such a way to make message boards trivial to implement. > > *) Will try very hard to keep all but the most unpopular content from > falling off the network. > > *** Philosophy behind DistribNet > > For most type of things the level of anonymity that freenet offers in > simply not needed. Even for copyrighted and censored material there > is, in general, little risk in actually viewing the information > because it is simply impractical to go after every single person who > access forbidden information. Most all of the time the lawsuits and > such are after the original distributors of the information and not the > viewers. There for DistribNet will offer the same level of anonymity > that freenet offers for distributing information, but not for actually > viewing it. However, since there *is* some information where even > viewing it is extremely risky, DistribNet will eventually be able to > provide the same level of anonymity that freenet offers, but it will > be completely optional. > > I also believe that knowing what is in one owns datastore and being > able to block certain type of material from one owns node is not that > big of a deal. Unless almost everyone blocks a certain type of > information the availability of blocked information will not be > harmed. This is because even if 90% of the nodes block say, kiddie > porn, the information will still be available on the other 10% of the > nodes which, if the network is designed correctly, should be more than > enough for anoyone to get at blocked information. Furthermore, since > the source code for DistribNet will be protected under the GPL or > similar license, it will be completely impractical for other to force > a significant number of nodes to block information. > > *** DistribNet Architecture > > I have not worked all the details of how DistribNet will work, but > here is what I have so far: > > There will essentially be two types of keys. Map keys and data keys. > Map keys will be uniquely identified in a similar manner as freenet SSK > keys. Data keys will be identified in a similar manner as freenet's > CHK keys. > > Map keys will contain the following information: > > * Short Description > * Public Namespace Key > * Timestamped Index pointers > * Timestamped Data pointers > > _At any given point in time_ each map key will only be associated with > one index pointer and one data pointer. Map keys can be updated by > appending a more a new index or data pointer to the existing list. By > fault, when a map key is queried only the most recent pointer will be > returned. However, older pointers are still there and may be retrieved > by specifying a specific date. Thus, map keys may be updated, but > information is never lost or overwritten. > > Data keys will be very much like freenet's chk keys except that they will > not be encrypted. Since they are not encrypted delta compression may > be used to save space. > > There will not be anything like freenet's KSK keys. Instead Map keys > may be requested with out a signature. If there is more than one map > key by that name than a list of keys is presented. To make such a > list meaning full every public key in freenet will have a descriptive > string associated with it. > > Query for keys will be handled similar to freenet but instead of > returning the actual data a pointer to the node which can easily > provide the data is returned. The data can then directly be transfered > from one node to another. Once transfered the data will be cached in > the local node. If a particular node notices a large number of query > for a key that it does not have it may chose to store a copy in its > own cache therefore providing similar performance benefits that freenet's > routing provides. > > *** Conclusion > > I really think I can make this work. So unless someone talks me out > of it I am extremely likely to code something out, with or without > other support. However, I am hopping I do not have to do it without. > > If you think this is a good idea be sure and let me know. If you > don't fell free to also let me know but keep it constructive and to the > point. If you start flaming me you will be ignored. > > --- > http://kevin.atkinson.dhs.org > > > _______________________________________________ > freenet-tech mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/tech > -- http://kevin.atkinson.dhs.org _______________________________________________ freenet-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/tech
