[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: [tor-talk] [tor-onions] Presentation on Onion Networking at the BCS

On 7/22/19, Alec Muffett <alec.muffett@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> "Why & How you should start using Onion Networking"
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pebRZyg_bh8

A fine introduction.

Yet how do people, including those involved with or using other
projects in the space, compare contrast and evaluate this with
"Why and how start using" and writing for... Onion, I2P, CJDNS,
MaidSafe, IPFS and all the other overlay networks out there
and forthcoming, all in their respective "non-exit" modes?

Whether it be for protocol layer capabilities HTTPS/TCP/UDP/IPv6,
or to achieve application layer... messaging, storage, web-ish, etc.

And how does each's lack or presence of whatever API
interfaces, UDP, broadcast, name layers, or other potential
transport and programming models, lend themselves to app
development and widespread eventual adoption and use?

And how, without offering IPv6 or the ultimately better all
encompassingly wide and modular, even cryptographic,
AF_OVERLAY interface that all networks could plug into,
does anyone expect to get everything interoperable and
working together?

[Note that comparing "traction" re all other nets
accessing facebook is false since those nets simply
do not offer a simple exit mode to do so as tor does.
What would be fair is if facebook had CJDNS, I2P, Onion,
etc interfaces, and then comparing those access stats,
scaled relative to each respective project estimates of
number of users, project advertising funding impact,
project *Browser availability, etc.]
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to