&zzz
+R4SAS
+RN_
+Stormycloud
+T3s|4
+cumlord
+dr|z3d
+hagen
+mareki2p
+postman
+qend-irc2p
+snex
Arch
BubbRubb
Daddy_
Danny
DeltaOreo
FreefallHeavens
Guest99
Irc2PGuest13210
Irc2PGuest20240
Irc2PGuest21940
Irc2PGuest22255
Irc2PGuest32330
Irc2PGuest74254
Irc2PGuest76033
Irc2PGuest78101
Onn4l7h
Onn4|7h
Over1
Sisyphus
Sleepy
SlippyJoe
T3s|4_
Teeed
Uncrushed_
aargh2
ac9f_
acetone_
anontor2
b3t4f4c3___
dr4wd3
duanin2
erniee
eyedeekay
eyedeekay_bnc
fus3r1
leopold
makoto
n1
nilbog-
noidea
onon_1
orignal
poriori_
profetikla
r00tobo
rapidash
shiver_
solidx66_
thetia
tr
u5657
uop23ip
vivid_reader56
w8rabbit
wodencafe2
x74a6
zelgomer
dr|z3d
zzz: re scaling and torrents per tunnel (http://zzz.i2p/topics/3409), have you considered a configuration option to assign new tunnel every x torrents, and to further frustrate timing attacks, a random startup delay per each tunnel?
dr|z3d
a new tunnel per x torrents, or max x tunnels to be shared between all existing torrents, where a torrent is randomly assigned to one of the tunnels.
zzz
no. huge mess. call sponge or run multiple snarks
dr|z3d
lol
dr|z3d
it doesn't need to be a huge mess, but I agree that one tunnel per torrent is a recipe for fail.
dr|z3d
doesn't bigly allow for multiple dests per instance?
zzz
bumped the 9 year old multi-snark forum post
dr|z3d
tldr? "no, I'm not doing it. ever." ? :)
zzz
yes it would be a mess. Trying to convince me something is easy never, ever, ever works
dr|z3d
not trying to convince you of anything tbh. I know better :)
dr|z3d
you vaguely touched on blinded destinations for i2psnark before I recall, is that an easier proposition?
zzz
would have to get postman and parg involved so that would be a whole thing. udp trackers is before that
dr|z3d
ok, you're not ruling it out then. that's good.
zzz
its really hard to retrofit
zzz
and udp trackers is stalled because I screwed myself
zzz
originally defined it as 2 RTT protocol which is hard but coded it all
zzz
then woke up one day and decided 1 RTT would be secure and ripped out all the 2 RTT code
zzz
then later realized it's not that secure
zzz
not even sure if I still have a copy of the 2 RTT code or what
dr|z3d
ouch :|
dr|z3d
if you need reminding (which I'm sure you don't), git branches are free :)
zzz
still have it
dr|z3d
nice, panic over!
zzz
also in mtn branch from 2014
zzz
anyway what's in trunk now is the 1 RTT flavor, checked in in January, "target 1.8.0" lol
dr|z3d
oh well, 1.8.0 can be 2.0 :)
dr|z3d
you were working on it for zzzot, no? how far did you get with that.
zzz
i think that side is done and supports both 1 and 2 RTT
zzz
parg said he'd do the 2 RTT flavor
dr|z3d
excuse my ignorance, but what's the difference between 1 and 2? not even sure I know what RTT is in this context.
zzz
see proposal 160, but basically 2 rtt is one round trip to get a token and then one for the announce. kinda like SSU2.
dr|z3d
ok, thanks
zzz
with datagrams you can't prove it's you unless you respond
zzz
the clearnet flavor is 2 RTT but I foolishly convinced myself we didn't need it
dr|z3d
oh well, live and learn, eh? :)