[tahoe-dev] dynamic ip

[Daira Hopwood (formerly David-Sarah)]

On 16/06/13 19:55, erpo41 at gmail.com wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 16, 2013 at 6:17 AM, Greg Troxel <gdt at ir.bbn.com> wrote:
>> True.  The biggest challenges I see are
>>
>>   accounting, so you can have some measure of fairness (even among
>>   friends who are trying to be reasonable, you need a way to know if
>>   you've accidentally consuemed 10x what you thought you had)
>>
>>   expiration/garbage-collection.  There needs to be a way for old shares
>>   to go away, but it needs to be safe against normal activities, and
>>   safe against vanishing for a few months.

That should be solved by the design in
<https://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/ticket/1832>.

> I may be naive here, but I believe both of these problems can be
> solved by looking to traditional filesystems. Each filesystem object
> has an owner--that makes it possible and easy to do accounting. Right
> now objects are somewhat anonymous, which I don't see as an advantage
> in any of Tahoe's use cases. If you need to distribute data to people
> anonymously I think a model like Freenet's would provide better
> protection.

I disagree that objects being anonymous isn't an advantage; it facilitates
deduplication and sharing. The approach we're taking to accounting is that
leases are owned, not filesystem objects.

> The necessity for garbage collection IMHO comes from the fact that
> it's possible to lose or forget the root of a directory structure. Why
> not use the dropbox model, where it's just like another drive with a
> single root per user?

That model requires a central authority to allow recovering the root,
which we don't want (or at least don't want to require).

-- 
Daira Hopwood ⚥

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 555 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://tahoe-lafs.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/attachments/20130618/c575acaa/attachment-0001.pgp>