rich1.0npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwethttps://nostr.ae/npub1f2nvlx49er5c7sqa43src6ssyp6snd4qwvtkwm5avc2l84cs84esecrwetnjumphttps://nostr.ae📅 Original date posted:2011-12-17 🗒️ Summary of this message: The author suggests structuring a network in a hypercube and using prefixes to address different parts of the network for storing transactions and blocks. They advise against using DHT without a working implementation. Mutual authentication of peers could address concerns about the tragedy of the commons. 📝 Original message:On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 8:37 AM, Christian Decker <decker.christian at gmail.com> wrote: > My idea was to structure the network in a hypercube and use prefixes to > address different parts of the network, and use those prefixes also to find > the location where an item (transaction, block, ...) should be stored. Each > vertex in the hypercube is a small, highly connected, cluster of nodes. I strongly advise people who are not me to use this sort of scheme, so that I may enjoy the benefits of robbing you blind. .... But really, saying "some sort of DHT" without basically presenting a working implementation that demonstrates the feasibility of solving the very difficulty attack resistance problems these schemes have basically triggers my time-wasting-idiot filter. (Or likewise, presenting a fixed network structure that would have a nice small and easily identifiable min-cut...) I don't doubt I'm completely alone in this, though perhaps I'm more of a jerk about it. Even if your actual proposal might have some merit you should be aware that every fool who has operated a bittorrent client has heard of "DHT" and, although they may not even understand what a hash table is, many have no reservation going around suggesting them for _every_ distributed systems problem. Want to scale matrix multiples? DHT! Want to validate bitcoin blocks? DHT! Network syncup slow (because It's bound on validation related local IO)? DHT! I suggest people solve the real problems first, then worry what name to give the solutions. ;) To address gavin's tragedy of the commons concern, one useful feature would being able to mutually authenticate a peer... then full nodes could pick and choose which lite nodes they're willing to do (a lot of) hard work for. This would also be valuable because some modes of lite operation require non-zero trust of the full node being queried.