Tuesday, November 26, 2003 22:00:00 CET
[22:04] <jrand0m> agenda:
[22:04] <jrand0m> 0) welcome
[22:04] <jrand0m> 1) status
[22:04] <jrand0m> 2) transport futures
[22:05] <jrand0m> 3) peer stats for selection
[22:05] <jrand0m> 4) apps
[22:05] <jrand0m> 5) ...?
[22:05] <jrand0m> 0)
[22:05] <jrand0m> hi.
[22:05] <jrand0m> 66 is it?
[22:05] <duck> 7) what brand of whiskey does jrand0m drink?
[22:06] <jrand0m> bushmills, glenlivit
[22:06] <jrand0m> (for whiskey and whisky, respectively)
[22:06] <TC> yey, i made the meating
[22:06] <jrand0m> woot
[22:06] <jrand0m> ok, 1) status
[22:06] <jrand0m> the kademlia stuff is coming along very well.
[22:07] <jrand0m> I've build a little simulator that runs a network of five nodes and puts them through the basic tests
[22:07] <jrand0m> also the idn stuff is implemented with some tests as well
[22:08] <jrand0m> the last two days or so have been focused on making sure the kademlia code works for both idn and for the i2p netdb, which has caused a bunch of changes
[22:09] <jrand0m> actually, the big change is that I'm forcing myself to be practical and make the kademlia code work first with the netDb and /then/ think about the idn stuff.
[22:10] <jrand0m> idn right now is kind of functional, except for inter-node comm (which will be replaced with comm over i2p, of course ;)
[22:10] <TC> idn is the stuff for the distributed storage?
[22:10] <jrand0m> roadmap has been updated as well - http://wiki.invisiblenet.net/iip-wiki?I2PRoadmap
[22:10] <jrand0m> yes
[22:10] <jrand0m> idn = Invisible Distribution Network
[22:10] <jrand0m> (free open source anonymous akamai, basically)
[22:11] <TC> is there a non anonymous public akamai implemintation i could play with?
[22:11] *** leenookx (~leenookx@anon.iip) has joined channel #iip-dev
[22:12] <jrand0m> mnet is probably up that alley
[22:12] *** Signoff: nickthief60934 (Excess Flood)
[22:12] <jrand0m> before I jump back into the router completely, I'm planning on leaving the idn code in a state that /hopefully/ someone would be able to jump in and make that into a usable app.
[22:13] *** dm (~sd@anon.iip) has joined channel #iip-dev
[22:14] *** nickthief60934 (~chatzilla@anon.iip) has joined channel #iip-dev
[22:14] <jrand0m> if you see the roadmap, kademlia has been pushed into the 0.2.2 release. in addition, there are also two big outstanding things that I hope to have in there, fixing a pair of bugs that do annoying things
[22:14] <TC> would it be posible do image grabs do idn from an i2ptunnel eepsite?
[22:15] <jrand0m> hmm?
[22:15] <jrand0m> oh, like <img src="idn:blah">?
[22:15] <TC> i was just thinking of bandwidth saving, yes
[22:15] <Ophite1> protocol would be the obvious way to go, yes.
[22:16] <jrand0m> hmm Ophite1?
[22:17] <jrand0m> (sorry, I'm sick again so might not be quite on top of my game today)
[22:17] <dm> how many LOC have you written jr?
[22:17] <TC> Ophite1, could i2p tunnel be modified to redirect?
[22:18] <TC> or could the browser do it on its own somehow?
[22:18] <jrand0m> dm> "find . -exec grep \\\; {} \; | wc -l" currently puts the sdk ~8kloc, the router ~11kloc
[22:18] <dm> okay thanks.
[22:19] <jrand0m> idn would want to support receiving requests from browsers.
[22:19] <Ophite1> would mean integrating idn into i2ptunnel. very ugly.
[22:19] <jrand0m> currently idn has a so-god-damn-easy api.
[22:19] <jrand0m> the api is the file system.
[22:19] <jrand0m> aka:
[22:19] <jrand0m> command=get
[22:19] <jrand0m> key=zGb1tPM6ARNRTWZLCWK4XXco2Ngk8ccx-ciDUCom~9U
[22:19] <jrand0m> saveAs=testGetOutput.txt
[22:20] <jrand0m> place that in a file in a directory, and voila.
[22:20] <jrand0m> (that was the easiest possible for me to implement and test with. certainly better ones can be found and made)
[22:21] <jrand0m> ok, so, yeah. thats the status. I'm hoping for a 0.2.2 release by this time next week, at least.
[22:22] <jrand0m> that'll include the first integration of the kademlia stuff, tunnel fixes, and i2cp updates.
[22:23] <jrand0m> ok, 2) transport futures
[22:23] <jrand0m> I don't like our tcp transport. and our udp transport is disabled. and our phttp transport is tweaky.
[22:23] * jrand0m would like to see the tcp transport replaced with tls / ssl / some-other-standard
[22:24] <Ophite1> link-level encryption is a requirement?
[22:24] <jrand0m> absolutely.
[22:25] <Ophite1> tls is _hell_ though. ask openssl.
[22:25] <tonious> ssh?
[22:25] <Ophite1> that, too.
[22:25] <jrand0m> yeah, I followed the nasty discussions on the cryptography list last month, with interest.
[22:25] <jrand0m> ssh is definitely a possibility.
[22:26] <jrand0m> safe, too, since we already essentially have the certificates (in the RouterInfo.publicKey)
[22:26] <Ophite1> but we're in java. we'd have to code it ourselves? :/
[22:26] <jrand0m> naw, there are ssl, tls, and ssh java libs
[22:26] *** Signoff: nickthief60934 (Ping timeout)
[22:26] <tonious> There's already at least one java ssh client. Dunno about servers.
[22:26] <Ophite1> re: security of such libs, given numerous high profile holes in openssl, openssh, et al?
[22:27] <jrand0m> Ophite1> most likely better than custom built code.
[22:27] <jrand0m> not that I have any reason to think there are exploits in the tcp transport as written.
[22:27] <jrand0m> but it has not been reviewed.
[22:28] *** nickthief60934 (~chatzilla@anon.iip) has joined channel #iip-dev
[22:28] <jrand0m> in any case, updating the transports isn't really on deck until january (after the 0.3 release goes out)
[22:28] <jrand0m> but if anyone wants to look into it and do some research, that'd be great
[22:29] <TC> how many devs do we have activly coding?
[22:29] <dm> 1! :)
[22:29] <jrand0m> you can see who commits via (Link: http://i2p.dnsalias.net/pipermail/i2p-cvs/2003-November/thread.html)http://i2p.dnsalias.net/pipermail/i2p-cvs/2003-November/thread.html
[22:29] <tonious> But he's got the strength of ten men....
[22:30] <jrand0m> mihi has been cleaning up some of my messes, thankfully :)
[22:30] <dm> haha, it's all jrandom :)
[22:30] <dm> nice way of saying "just me"
[22:31] <dm> I noticed that about mihi, when he got involved in frazaa, he just showed up one day and started cleaning up my (horrid) java. It was quite entertaining.
[22:31] <jrand0m> heh
[22:31] <Ophite1> people like that are very, very useful :)
[22:32] <jrand0m> quite
[22:32] <dm> "who's writing all these catch statements who do nothing ;)" -mihi
[22:32] <jrand0m> d'oooh
[22:33] <Ophite1> it's cause of reminders like that the code won't get as bad as freenet (we hope?) :)
[22:33] <jrand0m> if in 5 years any of the current i2p code is still in use, I'll be shocked.
[22:34] <jrand0m> (it had better be ported into finely tuned ASM code by then!)
[22:34] * Ophite1 makes his "java implementation is just a prototype" speech
[22:34] <dm> well, if you're still working on it 4 years from now, I'll guarantee that It'll be in use 5 years from now :)
[22:34] <TC> heh, comment it out and leave it in place
[22:35] <dm> is there a link to see the source on the web? not just the changes.
[22:35] <jrand0m> yes dm, http://i2p.dnsalias.net/
[22:35] <dm> nm, found it.
[22:35] <jrand0m> :)
[22:35] <jrand0m> ok, 4) peer stats for selection
[22:36] <jrand0m> calling this a nebulus topic is one hell of an understatement.
[22:36] <jrand0m> doctoral theses could be written (and some have been) on how to choose what peers to use in an untrusted environment.
[22:36] <dm> public interface Job
[22:36] <dm> oops, meeting. Sorry didn't realize.
[22:37] <jrand0m> the good part is that half of our peer selection is already taken care of - the selection of peers to find other peers.
[22:37] <jrand0m> (thats the kademlia stuff)
[22:38] <jrand0m> the part thats left is the selection of peers to participate in tunnels, to route garlics, and to bounce replies through
[22:38] *** Signoff: dm (EOF From client)
[22:38] *** Signoff: TC (EOF From client)
[22:38] *** Signoff: leenookx (EOF From client)
[22:38] <jrand0m> what I'm thinking for 0.3 is just going to be a simple history of each peer, tested periodically
[22:39] *** TC (~TC@anon.iip) has joined channel #iip-dev
[22:39] *** leenookx (~leenookx@anon.iip) has joined channel #iip-dev
[22:39] <jrand0m> stats revolving around latency and uptime
[22:39] *** Signoff: soros (Client exiting)
[22:39] <Ophite1> suggest you be wary of including accurate information about bandwidth usage and latency in that stats.
[22:40] <Ophite1> as per my drunken questions.
[22:40] <Ophite1> perhaps a more indirect route, but it's an area that needs very careful, well considered attention.
[22:40] <jrand0m> hmm, with the intent of keeping the accurate info unknown, or to defeat predictabilities?
[22:40] <jrand0m> right
[22:41] <jrand0m> this discussion is for a release that won't go out until at least jan 1
[22:42] * jrand0m understands and agrees that we want to avoid the predictabilities
[22:42] <jrand0m> but I think we want to gather and use as accurate info as we can, /then/ adjust for entropy
[22:42] <Ophite1> mere entropy alone may not be enough.
[22:43] <Ophite1> but, I need more research on this :/
[22:43] <jrand0m> true - randomly deciding to garlic route a message rather than tunnel route it, or to use a sequence of tunnels instead of one directly, etc
[22:44] <jrand0m> no rush, just wanted to plant the subject in the minds of those out there :)
[22:44] <jrand0m> ok, 4) apps
[22:45] <Ophite1> been troubling me for a week or more; though, I'm happy to announce I've run into a brick wall so far :)
[22:45] <jrand0m> w00t :)
[22:45] <Ophite1> inclusion of accurate or accurate+some%entropy statistics may make some attacks work though.
[22:46] <TC> oh, before apps i have a question
[22:46] <jrand0m> well, its always easy enough to simply discard accurate info as necessary
[22:46] *** Signoff: nickthief60934 (Excess Flood)
[22:46] <jrand0m> sure tc, whats up?
[22:46] <jrand0m> (stats will also (hopefully) make it easier to debug the network's operation while in development)
[22:46] <TC> when are manditory minium hop counts (or something like it) going to start?>
[22:47] *** nickthief60934 (~chatzilla@anon.iip) has joined channel #iip-dev
[22:47] <jrand0m> right now the default minimum tunnel length is one non-local hop
[22:47] *** dm (~sd@anon.iip) has joined channel #iip-dev
[22:47] * TC didnt know that
[22:48] <Ophite1> which is okay as long as the non-local hop doesn't KNOW it's the only non-local hop.
[22:48] <jrand0m> that will be up'ed to 2-4 once things are more reliable
[22:48] <jrand0m> right Ophite1
[22:48] <Ophite1> still one better than a gnunet shortcut, so it's cool :)
[22:48] <TC> oh, and how do speed improvements look?
[22:48] * jrand0m is basing that 2-4 # on o-r comments
[22:49] <Ophite1> temporary stats for network testing are okay by me, and very useful, but please bear in mind they may be a dangerous feature for production anonymity.
[22:49] <jrand0m> hmm, speed improvements will come through more reliable and faster peer selections, which is the 0.3 release
[22:49] <dm> jeez, I forgot how jr's code looks like it was written by a robot.
[22:49] <dm> Hmmm, that would explain a lot.
[22:50] <Ophite1> and through more scalable routing, which is next weeks' :)
[22:50] <jrand0m> heh sorry dm, I'll try to be more inconsistent ;)
[22:50] <Ophite1> (did I just mean discovery?)
[22:50] <jrand0m> right, its discovery, not routing, really.
[22:51] <jrand0m> i2p is scale free for normal comm.
[22:51] <jrand0m> (and o(log(n)) for discovery)
[22:51] <TC> i think your average ai who lives on the net would be pro i2p, what do you think dm?
[22:52] <dm> I think the average method size in this code is the smallest I've ever seen is what I think.
[22:53] <Ophite1> dm: clean. very good for a proto :)
[22:53] <dm> Do you comment as you go or do you go back and put those descriptions?
[22:53] <jrand0m> I comment when I get confused
[22:54] <jrand0m> (I really can't wait until collections are typesafe)
[22:54] <jrand0m> but, yeah, 4) apps :)
[22:54] <jrand0m> (unless anyone else has router / network questions?)
[22:55] <TC> pnope
[22:55] <jrand0m> ok, wiht isn't here, anyone else have any naming service thoughts / comments (mrecho?)
[22:55] <TC> a distributed naming server?
[22:56] <dm> is wiht ever here?
[22:56] <tonious> It could probably just sit on top of IDN.
[22:56] <jrand0m> yeah, I'd really love to see the naming service be a dht (perhaps reusing the idn / kademlia code) containing CA signed entries
[22:56] <TC> did co die?
[22:56] <jrand0m> exactly tonious
[22:57] <jrand0m> perhaps you're right, it could be an app that /uses/ idn, not just uses the code. hmmm...
[22:57] <jrand0m> that'd be Good.
[22:57] <tonious> Mebbe have a key fingerprint associated in case of collisions.
[22:57] <jrand0m> naw, co/wiht is around every few days
[22:57] <tonious> Wouldn't even necessarily need a centralized CA?
[22:57] <jrand0m> we'd need a CA if nyms are unique.
[22:58] <Ophite1> The CA signing chain should elminiate collisions.
[22:58] <jrand0m> (and we need nyms to be unique to do naming, really)
[22:58] <Ophite1> of course this makes CA key very important.
[22:58] <TC> how about dys dns? can i make my host file redirect to a eepsite?
[22:59] <tonious> TC: Not really. The OS doesn't even see i2p.
[22:59] <jrand0m> though we could have $nym.$ca be the thing looked up for
[22:59] <Ophite1> perhaps so important we want to distribute trust by it signing some second level .*.i2p domains, and have virtually all stuff under that, *.*.i2p - i.e., jrand0m.nym.i2p
[22:59] <jrand0m> right, though with tusko's ppp2p we can get i2p to IP mappings
[23:00] <tonious> I dunno. The idea of a CA in an essentially distributed system disagrees with me.
[23:00] <tonious> Not bein' a developer though I'm not gonna make a fuss :)
[23:01] <TC> dns really isnt that importent
[23:01] <jrand0m> tonious> we can do a web of trust, essentially. with, say, 8 seperate known CAs, everyone's local name server knows about those 8, and each of them manages a subdomain (e.g. tc.ca1 or Nightblade.ca2, or we add a .i2p at the end)
[23:01] <Ophite1> if you can think of a better way?
[23:02] <Nostradumbass> i have another question - its sort of spans the network-application area.
[23:02] <jrand0m> (thats really the degenerate case of a WoT)
[23:02] <Ophite1> what I said, sort of - get a root key to sign domains...
[23:02] <jrand0m> agreed tc
[23:02] <jrand0m> fire away Nostradumbass
[23:02] <Ophite1> someone gets com.i2p or nym.i2p...
[23:02] <Nostradumbass> has any thought been goven to guaranteed latency?
[23:02] <Ophite1> allow them to sign jrand0m.nym.i2p, or whatever.
[23:02] <Nostradumbass> i'm thinking of VoIP.
[23:03] <jrand0m> Ophite1> we wouldn't even need a .i2p key with that
[23:03] <tonious> Ophite1: What if the com ca gets taken out by an RIAA hitsquad or something?
[23:03] <jrand0m> Nostradumbass> you mean VoI2P? :)
[23:03] <Ophite1> then once you're done, destroy the master CA.
[23:03] <Nostradumbass> yes
[23:03] <Ophite1> tonious: then there's still the others.
[23:04] <Ophite1> or some system that requires conspiring groups to get the nym signing key?
[23:04] <jrand0m> Nostradumbass> we have already had people run shoutcast streams over i2p with some buffering at 96khz and no buffering problems at less speed. but there's latency.
[23:04] <Nostradumbass> with the upcoming release of cryptophone's (Link: http://www.cryptophone.de/)http://www.cryptophone.de/ source it could make an interesting app for i2p.
[23:04] <Ophite1> and a really freakin' big hashcash?
[23:04] <jrand0m> definitely Nostradumbass
[23:04] <tonious> Ophite1: Mebbe a majority signing protocol?
[23:04] *** Signoff: dm (Ping timeout)
[23:04] <jrand0m> tonious> majority is dangerous with sybil
[23:05] <Ophite1> tonious: otoh, it HAS to be non-repudiatory, and has to be able to guarantee non-collision.
[23:05] <Ophite1> and majority couldn't do that.
[23:05] <Ophite1> a majority of well known users maybe.
[23:05] <Ophite1> if it's a consolation, the internet has problems with this too (think Verisign).
[23:05] <jrand0m> right, WoT :)
[23:06] <Ophite1> but then WoT means that different people might have different ideas of who to trust, which violates non-collision maybe?
[23:06] *** thecrypto (~thecrypto@anon.iip) has joined channel #iip-dev
[23:06] <jrand0m> Nostradumbass> now if we could get some coders to work on a high performance RTSP over i2p tunnel... ;)
[23:06] <Ophite1> it's important, given the length of an "I2P address", but also hard.
[23:06] *** Drak0h (~Dr4k0h@anon.iip) has joined channel #iip-dev
[23:07] <Ophite1> Nostradumbass: not guaranteed.
[23:07] <TC> so how do we secure alias identification (important for commerce and seting up multiple eepsites)?
[23:07] <Nostradumbass> over-provisioning of bandwidth is often the only simple way to try and guarantee latency. is there going to ba any way for a node to determine the available bandwidht at another node, so as to ease routing for VoIP apps?
[23:07] <jrand0m> yes Nostradumbass, QoS can be done transparently within i2p, but unfortunately thats (I hate saying this) > 1.0
[23:07] <tonious> Say we take root CAs out of it. You generate your key and sign your aliases.
[23:08] *** Signoff: thecrypto (EOF From client)
[23:08] <Ophite1> Nostradumbass: also, troublesome re some potential attacks?
[23:08] <tonious> You also specify who's keys you trust, ala PGP. I think redundancy is more important than collision.
[23:08] <Ophite1> tonious: so which jrand0m.nym.i2p did you want again?
[23:08] * jrand0m attacks the ns dht to get my nym back
[23:08] <Ophite1> if everyone doesn't trust the same, we might not be referring to the same thing when we use the same name.
[23:09] <Ophite1> and it would probably allow freenet-KSK-style collision wars.
[23:09] <jrand0m> right. either the naming service has CA signed nyms, or it just distributes H(destination) --> destination mappings
[23:09] <tonious> Just pop up a menu or something. Or if you're designing an application that talks to a specific server, give it the public key of the signing agent?
[23:10] <jrand0m> (and H(destination) == 42 chars as opposed to ~500 chars for a destination)
[23:10] <Ophite1> tonious: if you're going to give it public keys, you might as well just sling around I2P addresses.
[23:10] <Ophite1> now that's an interesting ideal
[23:10] <Ophite1> assuming sha-256 can't be reversed that yields 256-bit I2P addresses that could be "looked up" to reveal the structure.
[23:10] *** dm (~sd@anon.iip) has joined channel #iip-dev
[23:11] <Ophite1> I smell kademlia again.
[23:11] <jrand0m> :)
[23:11] <Ophite1> It can also be simply checked.
[23:11] <jrand0m> and there's existing code to reuse.
[23:11] <Ophite1> somehow, that makes sense. why weren't we doing this already? :)
[23:11] <jrand0m> because we want nyms
[23:12] <Ophite1> nyms for hosts?
[23:12] <jrand0m> but, I suppose, 42 chars is a good enough starting point
[23:12] <Ophite1> need a root CA for that :/
[23:12] <jrand0m> right
[23:12] <Ophite1> in the case where you don't want to trust a root ca?
[23:12] <Ophite1> 42 chars is short enough to paste.
[23:12] <jrand0m> you don't need a root CA, you can have a forest instead of a tree
[23:12] <Ophite1> 520 chars isn't :)
[23:12] <jrand0m> heh
[23:13] <Ophite1> but if you have a forest, how does anyone know which tree you're talking about?
[23:13] <Ophite1> you could slap a key in there, but then, ooh, we've got huge strings of random garbage again.
[23:13] <jrand0m> common suffix. $nym.$ca
[23:13] <Ophite1> well, I'd like $nym.$ca.i2p :)
[23:13] <Ophite1> avoid confusion :)
[23:13] <jrand0m> right. I mean, there are possible attacks. I dunno. I'm with TC though
[23:13] <jrand0m> good 'nuff for me
[23:14] <jrand0m> ok, /other/ apps :)
[23:14] <Ophite1> how do you know which ca is which?
[23:14] <Ophite1> you have a list? what signs the list?
[23:14] <jrand0m> i2pns.config
[23:14] *** Signoff: Drak0h (Ping timeout)
[23:14] <Ophite1> how're you going to get that?
[23:14] <TC> if i could make my own dns list, hostfile style i would be happy
[23:14] <jrand0m> on install
[23:15] <Ophite1> how are you going to verify those are the "right" keys?
[23:15] <Ophite1> ca substitution?
[23:15] <jrand0m> right tc, we can even do that without any distributed naming service
[23:15] <TC> because i say they are Ophite1
[23:15] <jrand0m> Ophite1> you aren't, any more than you're verifying that the source code is running the "real" i2p
[23:15] <TC> and if you trust me, you can download them off my eepsite
[23:16] <Ophite1> I suppose at the end of the day you can only reduce that to trust in one key being right, so :)
[23:16] <Ophite1> works for me, yeah.
[23:16] <Ophite1> as long as I get o1.i2p ;)
[23:16] <jrand0m> heh
[23:17] <tonious> Hmm. Revised threshold scheme: Each CA works the entire namespace, but a majority of CAs must agree before handing out subspace?
[23:17] <jrand0m> ok, last I heard tusko had found a way to get the ppp2p to run off windows machines as well as *nix
[23:17] <TC> it would make the i2p\internet doman system much more community based if we all passed around a huge hostfile\cheat sheet
[23:17] <Ophite1> tonious: back to majority again...
[23:17] <jrand0m> scary for attacks tonious
[23:17] <jrand0m> thats true TC
[23:17] <jrand0m> (and the value of such a community should not be underestimated)
[23:18] <Ophite1> tc: arpanet stylee?
[23:18] <tonious> Sigh. :)
[23:18] <Ophite1> I guess seeds have gotta come from somewhere, so yeah ;)
[23:18] <TC> to get a domain name, you would say this is me, and if people agreed they would change the file, and if they where trusted, others would download updates
[23:19] <jrand0m> sounds like that'd be a heavily retrieved key from idn :)
[23:19] <Ophite1> smells vaguely ca-like too :)
[23:19] <TC> you could even have a fight, with more then one file
[23:19] <Ophite1> the fidonet nodelist!
[23:19] <tonious> And in case of a netsplit there'd be multiple patchfiles.
[23:19] <Ophite1> ...doesn't scale.
[23:19] <jrand0m> with under a few hundred domains, its maintainable manually
[23:20] <TC> after a few hundred you go trusted
[23:20] <jrand0m> right Ophite1. this would just be until we argue out the Right Way.
[23:20] <tonious> It might be enough to jumpstart a WoT.
[23:20] <jrand0m> (or we convince people that CAs aren't that bad ;)
[23:20] <jrand0m> true tonious
[23:20] <Ophite1> if you're trusting someone to agree that someone is someone else, that's a CA, not just a nodelist :)
[23:21] <tonious> Heh. Sorry for bein' the skeptic.
[23:21] <TC> jrand0m, in the end i dont whant to be dependent on CA's
[23:21] <Ophite1> just allow people to give space below theirs...
[23:21] <Ophite1> castyle -- and those on the nodelist to be the cas.
[23:21] <Ophite1> course then it's all "which ca is jrand0m on?"
[23:21] <jrand0m> CA's aren't necessarily choke points. if they're unsatisfactory, we replace them.
[23:22] <tonious> Ophite1: I like that.
[23:22] <Ophite1> point. CA being crapped out would be Big Enough News for someone to simply replace them.
[23:22] <Ophite1> tonious: so is it slashdot.org or slashdot.com? goatse.cx? :)
[23:22] <dm> what does CA stand for? :)
[23:22] <Ophite1> certification authority.
[23:23] <dm> k, thanks.
[23:23] <tonious> Heh. That's where your own WoT comes in, Ophite1.
[23:23] <Ophite1> tonious: yes, but I still have to see goatse once before I realise it's the wrong bloody one. :)
[23:23] <tonious> 'I trust Ophite1 not to show that horrible asshole, and he signed slashdot.org'
[23:23] <jrand0m> lol
[23:24] <Ophite1> so essentially you're trusting a limited subset of people, not to be horrible assholes.
[23:24] * jrand0m reserves the right to be an asshole at times
[23:24] <Ophite1> and to hand out domains to the rest.
[23:24] <Ophite1> at least one of which ought, really, to be a trent-style first-comes-first-served bot.
[23:24] <Ophite1> (with.. yes... hashcash.)
[23:24] <tonious> Yeah. And there may be namespace collisions by people who are outside my WoT...
[23:25] <jrand0m> yup, and another should be something like thetower's tfee/subpage redirects
[23:25] <Ophite1> tonious: something that you can actually USE might be appreciated. it's just a naming system. :)
[23:25] <tonious> Heh.
[23:25] <Ophite1> the good thing about multiple cas is that they can do their own thing re: that kind of thing - different policies.
[23:26] *** Signoff: nickthief60934 (Ping timeout)
[23:26] <jrand0m> ok, other apps...
[23:26] <jrand0m> IM?
[23:26] <Ophite1> finally :)
[23:26] <Ophite1> signed nyms! :)
[23:26] <tonious> Sorry Ophite1 :)
[23:26] <jrand0m> !thwap Ophite1
[23:27] <Ophite1> what, what are you all looking at? :)
[23:27] <Ophite1> yes, WoT would be appropriate for _that_ :)
[23:27] <dm> I think I remember who was doing IM... thecrypto?
[23:27] <Ophite1> in fact... elgamal 2048-bit... dsa 1024-bit... sha-256... sounds kind of familiar. openpgp?
[23:27] <jrand0m> yodel was in here the other day, mentioned that they had tried out running yodel's xml-rpc interface over with their own local router, and it worked. so, yay
[23:27] *** nickthief60934 (~chatzilla@anon.iip) has joined channel #iip-dev
[23:28] <tonious> I've managed to get SOAP going on mine, too.
[23:28] <jrand0m> yup dm
[23:28] <tonious> No useful apps, beyond 'Yep, it works' so far.
[23:28] <jrand0m> hehe
[23:29] *** Signoff: nickthief60934 (Excess Flood)
[23:29] <Nostradumbass> tonious: so SOAP over i2p = Black SOAP?
[23:29] * jrand0m really wants to get idn up and running so we can use i2p as an IP layer, not a TCP layer
[23:29] <jrand0m> lol Nostradumbass
[23:29] <Ophite1> nicename :)
[23:29] <tonious> Nostradumbass: Yep, you got it.
[23:30] <tonious> Now I can set up my own I2P casino. w00t!
[23:30] *** nickthief60934 (~chatzilla@anon.iip) has joined channel #iip-dev
[23:30] <jrand0m> w33wt
[23:30] <jrand0m> ok, I think thats 'bout it for the apps
[23:30] <jrand0m> 5) ...?
[23:31] <jrand0m> hi
[23:31] <Ophite1> tonious: cool. we could use a few of those. donate a percentage to the i2p project? :)
[23:31] <TC> merchandising
[23:31] <tonious> Has anybody thought of a C implementation of I2P?
[23:31] <jrand0m> yeah, rent out colo boxes and run routers :)
[23:32] <jrand0m> tonious> lets wait until we get the router protocol implemented and thoroughly reviewed before porting ;)
[23:32] <tonious> Or anonymous colo: Behind an I2P router and no internet routing :)
[23:32] <Ophite1> merchandising = logo.
[23:32] <TC> stickers, t-shirts, hats, we need the logo
[23:32] <Ophite1> tonious: after it's working and anonymous and stuff? of course.
[23:32] <tonious> Yeah, but I'm still running my P2 and I'm a poor guy.
[23:32] <tonious> :(
[23:32] <Ophite1> i2p needs a good logo.
[23:32] <Nostradumbass> yes
[23:32] <Ophite1> I mean, the internet doesn't have a logo, but that's just bad marketing. :)
[23:32] <dm> I like the one on the WIKI.
[23:32] <TC> also, each made-for-i2p program needs its own tweeked version, or take off of the logo
[23:32] <jrand0m> how about a transparent logo... it'd, be, like, everywhere, dood
[23:33] <Ophite1> an invisible logo. heh.
[23:33] <tonious> A 1 pixel by 1 pixel blank gif?
[23:33] <jrand0m> definnitely
[23:33] <Ophite1> tonious: we'd be sued for copyright infringment? :)
[23:33] <tonious> Ha!
[23:33] <Ophite1> ("Hey, that's OUR blank gif!")
[23:33] <jrand0m> lol
[23:33] <Ophite1> Hey, if John Cage can do it...
[23:33] <tonious> So we leave our names in the comments field :)
[23:33] <Nostradumbass> Ophite1: how about a stream roller paving over the Internet?
[23:33] <jrand0m> heh we're just rendering his audio
[23:34] <Ophite1> that one on the bottom looks the best imho.
[23:34] <tonious> I like the one on the top. It's simple. Like me.
[23:34] <Ophite1> with the arc design.
[23:35] <Ophite1> something that is small, very simple, and above all would work well as an icon, or in the system tray :)
[23:35] <Ophite1> and yes, which can be customised and used as a basis for logos of apps.
[23:35] <jrand0m> right
[23:35] <dm> How about a black circle with white fill.
[23:35] <Ophite1> that arc would be a good start (colour changes?)
[23:35] <dm> or a triangle, maybe a square!
[23:35] <dm> a parallelogram!
[23:37] <tonious> Heh. Open up a cafepress store...
[23:37] <Ophite1> god no, not cafepress.
[23:37] <dm> a white cloud!
[23:37] <Ophite1> we demand class. ... thinkgeek. ;-)
[23:37] <dm> little fluffy cloud.
[23:38] <TC> it would look toomuch like a cumpuddle in minature
[23:38] * jrand0m associates clouds with the sky, thankyouverymuch
[23:38] <tonious> Ophite1: First we've gotta convince 'em that we're whitehat.
[23:39] <TC> no, lets be black hat
[23:39] <jrand0m> tonious> can militant anarchists be whitehats too?
[23:39] * TC doesnt like ppl in hats
[23:39] <tonious> Dunno.
[23:39] * tonious wears a grey fedora FWIW.
[23:39] <Nostradumbass> how about a white and a black hat?
[23:39] <TC> and modulus would say somthing about class distinction or something
[23:40] <dm> a small picture of uncle sam's face?
[23:40] <TC> checkered hat?
[23:40] <jrand0m> heh tc
[23:40] <Nostradumbass> or white and a black wizzard hats
[23:40] <Ophite1> I am NOT a white hat. How dare you insinuate that. I want an apology.
[23:41] <TC> or a black dunce hat
[23:41] <jrand0m> well, anyway...
[23:42] <tonious> "i2p inside"?
[23:42] <jrand0m> heh
[23:42] <dm> I, too, pee...
[23:42] <jrand0m> dm> on a calvin sticker!
[23:42] <Ophite1> "i2p ... somewhere"
[23:42] <TC> so, logo ppl, come on! so can nop set us up a i2p cafepress site?
[23:43] * jrand0m repeats the mantra No PR until its ready.
[23:43] <Nostradumbass> dm: yeah, make it a "Concentration" style chrade logo-gram.
[23:43] <Nostradumbass> <eye> 2 and a pee-ing penis.
[23:44] <dm> Let's set a date.
[23:44] <jrand0m> heh, yeah, and you'll have your mother click on that icon?
[23:44] <dm> March 1st.
[23:44] <Nostradumbass> grab it, in fact :)
[23:44] <tonious> My mother disapproves of encryption :)
[23:44] *** UserX (~User@anon.iip) has joined channel #iip-dev
[23:44] <dm> Slashdot article! No matter how far (or not) jrand0m has gotten!
[23:44] <dm> Let's pile on the pressure.
[23:44] <Ophite1> nooooooo.
[23:44] <Ophite1> not yet!
[23:45] <jrand0m> damn dm, if you pulled that date out of thin air, you're good. in my palm I have 1.0 slotted as ~ march 1
[23:45] * dm slaps Ophite1
[23:45] <dm> i said march 1st.
[23:45] <Ophite1> the appropriate time to promote is when we have a cool shiny thing to wave at them.
[23:45] <Nostradumbass> please, no slashdot till the network is ready for the onslaught.
[23:45] <jrand0m> right
[23:45] <dm> I'm good, what can I say.
[23:45] <Ophite1> I call launch date April 4th.
[23:45] <Ophite1> 04/04/04 ;)
[23:45] <jrand0m> no PR until AFTER 1.0 comes out.
[23:45] <Nostradumbass> Mojo was almost destroyed by /.
[23:46] <dm> no, none of this rational thinking. March 1st, end of story.
[23:46] <jrand0m> ooOOo Ophite1
[23:46] * jrand0m senses that I'm going to have to submit to /. to get them to NOT post dm^H^Han anonymous person's article
[23:46] <Ophite1> no, don't do that. malda doesn't give a shit, and he'll post THAT :)
[23:46] <jrand0m> heh
[23:47] <dm> Yes, you will be ridiculed by my post: "Em, like, there's this like anonymous cool program that's better than kazaa, I2P it's awesome, it's fast, DSA124. yeah"
[23:47] <jrand0m> anyway, as things progress, http://wiki.invisiblenet.net/iip-wiki?I2PRoadmap will be updated
[23:48] <dm> time to pack.
[23:49] <jrand0m> (and some day I'm going to take a week off and go snowboarding)
[23:49] *** soros (~soros@anon.iip) has joined channel #iip-dev
[23:49] <jrand0m> yeah, we're about the 2hour mark.
[23:49] <jrand0m> time to...
[23:49] * jrand0m *baf*'s the meeting closed.