#ls2 (irc2p) | #ls2 I2P Protocol Development Discussion - Next Meeting Monday, October 9th 6:30 UTC

eyedeekay1 I've been giving it a lot of homework time and it seems like, for instance, KDF's largely say "exactly as noise" which might be fine, but since I'm catching up to everybody else on what properties that provides, I actually have no idea whether it's done

zzz it's certainly not done

zzz but there's really 3 parts:

zzz 1) basic connections

zzz 2) peer test

zzz 3) relay

zzz 1) should be pretty close except for the KDFs

zzz so maybe if we wanted we could start coding on 1) before finishing the spec for 2( and 3)

orignal what with KDF?

orignal shouldn't it be the same as for NTCP2?

zzz still have to do a split() and more HKDF

orignal what for?

zzz for the data phase keys

zzz I think

zzz but again, I'll be smarter next week

orignal but we do split for NTCP2

orignal for _ab and _ba

zzz yeah but the data phase is very different... no siphash...

orignal because we don't need to pass length

zzz right

orignal it's in UDP header

orignal and I guess we can use padding up to MTU

zzz padding blocks, same as NTCP2, yes

zzz eyedeekay1, you think you might try to code along with us in Go?

orignal no

orignal not the same

orignal because we are free to fill it up to MTU size

orignal with no cost

orignal I'm even not sure if we need it at all

zzz yes, but you want the padding covered by AEAD

zzz so we don't want padding outside the blocks

orignal fine

eyedeekay1 I can try, would be easiest to follow if you could put it on a branch for me

zzz there's nothing to put, we would all be working in parallel

orignal yes

eyedeekay1 OK will try to keep up :)

zzz would be a lot of work and you probably have a lot more todo just to have any transports at all

zzz anyway

zzz I thought of a 2), so anything else on 1) ?

eyedeekay1 Yeah but I can at least try, maybe learn where things go and write comments where I don't have something yet

orignal what's the proposal # ?

eyedeekay1 q59

eyedeekay1 ^159

zzz SSU2 is 159 i2p-projekt.i2p/spec/proposals/159

zzz and speaking of proposals

zzz 2) UDP Trackers

zzz i2p-projekt.i2p/spec/proposals/160

zzz I wrote this over the holidays

zzz I emailed ot to R4SAS since he's working on opentracker

zzz I don't think orignal cares, but maybe?

zzz we can discuss it here, or not

zzz just FYI for now

orignal huh?

zzz I've already gotten feedback from BiglyBT

orignal opentracker is a replacement of postman

orignal if he goes down again

orignal will check 160

zzz we also have ZzzOT which is a plugin only

zzz I could do ZzzOT standalone if somebody wanted it

orignal what's that?

zzz opentracker can't ever be a replacement of postman, it's just an opentracker

zzz ZzzOT is a java open tracker in a console plugin

zzz based mostly on the i2psnark code

zzz very simple

zzz I wrote it in March 2010

zzz a few people run it

zzz anything else on 2) ?

eyedeekay1 I've read it, so far my only commentary is that some of it seems "Optional" so to speak? Like the "fast mode"

zzz it's all optional, because we don't support it now

zzz there's two modes, one that's easier if your code supports clearnet udp trackers now, and one that's easier if you're coding it from scratch

zzz the former will be BiglyBT; the latter will be i2psnark

eyedeekay1 Yeah that's kind of what I was getting at

eyedeekay1 What I'm wondering is if there's an effective way to detect whether one or the other is supported and choose it?

eyedeekay1 And if so, wouldn't that give away your bittorrent client?

zzz when you announce, you 'give away your bittorrent client' anyway

eyedeekay1 Yeah I guess that's not something a client would spoof so the point is moot. Nevermind, thinking about it like web fingerprinting

zzz anyway, just FYI for now

zzz anything else on 2) ?

orignal no

eyedeekay1 No

zzz anything else for the meeting?

orignal busy with kazahstan affairs ))

zzz ok, good luck with KZ

zzz thanks guys

eyedeekay1 Thanks zzz

orignal i2p over ygg works good for them

zzz nice

orignal they connect ygg to that ports

orignal some people run outside KZ including me

orignal and then run i2p over this link

eyedeekay1 What do you do to handle/configure your yggdrasil links?

eyedeekay1 Are you simply making I2P connections over both the clearnet and ygg links or is it more elaborate than that?

orignal yggdrasil is another ipv6 adress

orignal from 200-399 range

orignal so you you support ygg and your peer has ygg address in RI

orignal link can be established through ygg

orignal more interesting if your router doesn't have any transports but ygg

orignal in this case you must make sure that first hop supports ygg

orignal same for floodfill

orignal usually you publish yourself through eploratory tunnels

orignal because you can't reach a FF directy

orignal another issue is reseed

orignal ygg-based reseeds always include few routers with ygg

RN does each hop in a tunnel need to support ygg?

orignal no

orignal only next to you

RN fun stuff

orignal why? it just works