Idea: Watchdog #70
标签
未选择标签
applications
BLOCKED
bug
design
duplicate
enhancement
fixed?
funding-needed
help wanted
infrastructure
invalid
payments
qubes
question
ready-for-implementation
refactor
spam
tapir-server
testing
tor
wontfix
未选择里程碑
未指派成员
2 名参与者
通知
到期时间
未设置到期时间。
依赖工单
没有设置依赖项。
参考:cwtch.im/cwtch#70
正在加载...
在新工单中引用
没有提供说明。
删除分支 %!s(<nil>)
删除分支是永久的。虽然已删除的分支在实际被删除前有可能会短时间存在,但这在大多数情况下无法撤销。是否继续?
One of the open problems we have is how peers find and choose cwtch servers and detect bad servers. Here is the barebones of an idea to solve part of that problem:
Watchdogs could also determine stats like server latency.
How peers find new servers is still an open question. I think an open directory might be a way to go, but has obvious issues some partially mitigated by having a watchdog in place.
Also, what's kinda cool about this approach is that we can build both parts as Cwtch applications.
How would you define "bad servers"? Based on the paper, I assume servers which selectively often fail to relay messages and modify relayed messages. Also servers with high latency, maybe?
The watchdog idea sounds quite reasonable and is similar to protocols which do computation verification through sampling. I think one of the biggest challenges would be how to limit the request overhead to servers, which in the worst case scenario could result in some sort of DoS. The overhead is not that large, but maybe its something that should be considered if the servers are publicly available and everyone can verify.
With the tokenboard server approach, key signing and ideas around trust-providers I'm going to close this issue in favour of exploring these ideas in technical reports/research papers on this topic in the future.