Re: Scalability and fairness [was: P2P over Tor [was: Anomos - anonBT]]

[grarpamp <grarpamp@xxxxxxxxx>]

>> So long as users are covering their bandwidth with giveback [1], I
...
>> - indeed provided back to the network as a 'moral' condition by
>> those same users.
...
>> case) you need to give back at least 6x your use. So you will already

> there's always a catch. ;)

Heh, yeah, no one ever suggested this would happen, as the leecher
mindset abounds :) It just seemed useful to actually ask for, examine
and collate the parameters under which it *could* happen successfully.
And the areas where Tor, or any other anonymous system, is permanently
incapable as a limitation of architecture. Or where the system
actually could be enhanced to better support what some users are
already going to use it for regardless of disencouragement.

It should be noted that one reason people ask about using anon
systems for such traffic is because they feel risk when doing so
in the clear. Either as consumer, distributor or participant. Being
anonymous may actually be the key they need that allows them to run
the seed/server/distributor side without fear. In other words...
I'd bet it's called 'filesharing' because most people actually *do*
want to give back and share, albeit safely.

Is anonymity the missing link to the global filesharing utopia
invisioned be all the various sharing systems? Who knows. We'll
find out.

>> [2] Isn't there a proposal out there to better handle magnitudes
>> more users [and avoid shutdown points] by getting rid of the
>> directories and self-hosting the TorNet into a DHT or something?
>
> Tor would become something else, perhaps UDP Tor.
>
> there has been more written on that subject than i can do justice

Wish the mbox or maildir archives were available/mirrored for easy
search, reading, reference and reply using native mail clients :)