Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [decentralization] p2p working group/standards

Expand Messages
  • Wesley M. Felter
    ... This remind me: Has anyone given thought to using SLP for discovery of nearby peers? I bet it would work great in dorms and corporate LANs. I think peer
    Message 1 of 55 , Feb 12, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      On Tue, 13 Feb 2001, Dan Moniz wrote:

      > >> 1) What is needed (or wanted) by most p2p developers that
      > >> would actually be worth standardizing?
      > >> 2) Are there any "plumbing" or mundane tasks, that every app
      > >> could benefit from?

      > 1. Peer discovery

      This remind me: Has anyone given thought to using SLP for discovery of
      nearby peers? I bet it would work great in dorms and corporate LANs.

      I think peer discovery and directories (i.e. name->IP mappings, where the
      name may be user@host style (Jabber, SIP), or free-form, or a public
      key) are something that could definitely be shared among systems.

      > 2. Common communications framework

      Invisible Worlds is pushing something through the IETF to this effect (the
      name keeps changing; I don't remember the latest one). I'm surprised at
      the lack of discussion about that.

      > Furthermore, the direction has been to do less encryption at the level of
      > SSL and more at the level of TLS (which is lower level) and IP, which I
      > think is a more sustainable solution long-term, combined with things like
      > DNSSEC and newer, less complex, more functional revisions of IPSEC.

      TLS lower-level than SSL? I don't think so. The problem with IPSec is that
      (AFAIK) it has to be in the networking stack, which is quite an
      engineering challenge compared to userspace code.

      I'll save the rest for my talk. :-)

      Wesley Felter - wesf@... - http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/wesf/
    • Ben Houston
      ... Probably going to SHA-1 isn t too big of a problem. I ll bring it up with those that I know. Interestingly, there are ways to add file hashes within the
      Message 55 of 55 , Feb 20, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Justin Chapweske said:
        > ... switch to SHA-1.
        >
        > The biggest group that I havn't yet talked to about this is the Gnutella
        > guys, but I'm sure they'd be into it as well. Any Gnutellians on the
        > list?

        Probably going to SHA-1 isn't too big of a problem. I'll bring it up with
        those that I know. Interestingly, there are ways to add file hashes within
        the existing protocol specifications - it should even be backwards
        compatible.

        Cheers,
        -ben houston
        http://www.exocortex.org/~ben
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.