On Wed, Oct 12, 2005 at 01:12:12PM -0400, jrandom at i2p.net wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > > Major telcos have MAJOR internal connectivity. 10Gbps per fiber... lots > > of fibers... I'd expect traffic flow analysis to increase the cost of > > the router significantly, for the simple reason that it would have to do > > a lot more. 100 operations per byte will cost a lot more than 10 > > operations per byte. > > You don't need to monitor every byte at every hop along the path, simply > at the point where the user connects to the network. End users do not > have carrier grade connections.
That isn't necessarily cheaper. > > > So why does the state block freenet 0.5 on the most primitive level, and > > that many years late? > > Simple economics, freenet 0.5 hasn't shown that its worth blocking yet. ... Except that they HAVE blocked it. > > $1k/ISP plus N smart-coder-hours plus J support hours plus legislation is > more expensive than blacklisting a website plus someone running a sniffer, > browsing Freenet's source, or looking at one of those commercially > available network identification tools which already can identify Freenet. They can't identify darknet traffic that easily. And $1000/ISP? If J is non-trivial, the overall cost will be much higher than that. Just for the hardware/software changes, $1000 is absurdly low. > > =jr -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20051012/1c6a0ca5/attachment.pgp>
