-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ian Clarke wrote: > Clearly connection churn is the price to be paid by higher update > probability with destination sampling. Are you sure that mroger's sims > will tell us anything about that?
I'm hoping to simulate churn once token-passing is done. I don't know anything about destination sampling, but I do feel that opennet could make load limiting more difficult for two reasons: 1) a selfish or malicious node can connect to a large number of opennet nodes and use its 'fair share' of capacity at each one 2) a selfish or malicious node that's detected by some kind of tit-for-tat/reputation mechanism can just generate a new identity and start again (hash cash and similar mechanisms place a significant burden on innocent users and don't deter attackers who are willing to spend more CPU on the problem than innocent users) In my opinion one of the greatest strengths of the darknet approach is that it avoids problems of this kind by using the existing trust relationships between users. Thinking out loud, is there any way to make it easier for users to find one another while preserving some of the "social pressure" of the darknet approach? For example: * Each node has a flag, "public" or "private" * If two of my peers are public, I automatically introduce them to one another * The process is not recursive - if Alice introduces me to Bob, I don't automatically introduce Bob to my other public peers * Bob's load-limiting tokens come from Alice's bucket, so Alice has an incentive not to introduce me to too many people (and no incentive to invent people) * If, at a later stage, I become friends with Bob and make him into a fully-fledged peer, he will be introduced to my other public peers and will get his own token bucket Cheers, Michael -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFE6r/hyua14OQlJ3sRAjJxAKDwhMUhw/0vSYIXPV9kewFLw/r+6wCfSA1n zLf3IXvmgIi6B9k6wqlkuGE= =+/fp -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
