> There are few commercial benefits/incentives for a DHT provider and few guarantees p2p tech can give a company requiring an always-on central presence.
There are quite a few commercial benefits! It's just that nobody's properly banked on them yet. P2P distributes costs, simplifies configuration & ops, and improves data privacy. For the politically-minded, P2P also distributes power more equitably by moving business logic to user devices.
P2P will not remove the need for always-on presences. You need a peer of last resort. However, running a peer will be cheaper and easier than running a server.
> One approach is to do the S/Kademlia thing where you require all peers to generate IDs (hash of a key) and require the it start with a certain number of 0 bits and then require another random X that, when xor'd w/ the ID, starts with a certain number of 0 bits.
We're looking at the crypto-puzzle approach, but there needs to be a work-requirement asymmetry between honest nodes and attackers, which I think is only the case with the Eclipse attacks and not the Sybil attacks. Otherwise, the puzzles only provide security if honest nodes outspend attackers, and we don't want to turn our userbase into mining farms.
There are quite a few commercial benefits! It's just that nobody's properly banked on them yet. P2P distributes costs, simplifies configuration & ops, and improves data privacy. For the politically-minded, P2P also distributes power more equitably by moving business logic to user devices.
P2P will not remove the need for always-on presences. You need a peer of last resort. However, running a peer will be cheaper and easier than running a server.
> One approach is to do the S/Kademlia thing where you require all peers to generate IDs (hash of a key) and require the it start with a certain number of 0 bits and then require another random X that, when xor'd w/ the ID, starts with a certain number of 0 bits.
We're looking at the crypto-puzzle approach, but there needs to be a work-requirement asymmetry between honest nodes and attackers, which I think is only the case with the Eclipse attacks and not the Sybil attacks. Otherwise, the puzzles only provide security if honest nodes outspend attackers, and we don't want to turn our userbase into mining farms.