Peter Hendrickson wrote: >Colin Tuckley writes: > > >>While I have to agree with you on this in theory, I feel it's rather >>premature in practice for the following reasons: >> >>1) Mixminion *is* still in alpha, there is a lot of testing going on >>and having the timed algorithm made that easier/quicker. >> >> > >Using the timed algorithm, however, gives a falsely positive picture >of how the system performs. Applications using Mixminion should be >developed and tested using the real thing. If the system is not >usable with a real mix algorithm, then we need to solve that problem. > > Agreed. Always test against the production model. The mixminion package itself is pretty stable. It's time to make the mixnet behave like a mixnet. >>If Nick thinks it's time for real algorithms then it's also time for >>the software to be Beta. (Comments Nick?) >> >> > >It is actually quite reasonable to use a real mix algorithm during the >Alpha or even development phases. There's simply no other way to get >a feel for how the real system will perform. > > Yes and yes. I've been burned by unrealistic testing before. >My judgment was and is that it's time to move forward. We might as >well try the system out with a real mix. Mixminion is beautifully >designed, but we've never really tried it out. > > Production-quality anonymizing networks are going to be a hot commodity soon. Let's be ahead of the curve. >In any event, Wiredyne is sticking with a real mix. > > As is Tweep. If something breaks, we fix it. -- Roy M. Silvernail is roy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, and you're not "It's just this little chromium switch, here." - TFT CRM114->procmail->/dev/null->bliss http://www.rant-central.com
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature