Delivery-Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 17:18:30 -0500
Return-Path: <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.1 (2010-03-16) on moria.seul.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.7 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED,
	DKIM_SIGNED,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,RP_MATCHES_RCVD,T_DKIM_INVALID,
	URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
X-Original-To: archiver@seul.org
Delivered-To: archiver@seul.org
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (eugeni.torproject.org [38.229.72.13])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by khazad-dum.seul.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 909BA1E0692;
	Mon, 15 Dec 2014 17:18:28 -0500 (EST)
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B6783206A;
	Mon, 15 Dec 2014 22:18:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0B4B93200C
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 22:18:20 +0000 (UTC)
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at 
Received: from eugeni.torproject.org ([127.0.0.1])
 by localhost (eugeni.torproject.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024)
 with ESMTP id r5wdYb9j9Ur2 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>;
 Mon, 15 Dec 2014 22:18:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-wi0-x229.google.com (mail-wi0-x229.google.com
 [IPv6:2a00:1450:400c:c05::229])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com",
 Issuer "Google Internet Authority G2" (not verified))
 by eugeni.torproject.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B616B248A4
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 22:18:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-wi0-f169.google.com with SMTP id r20so11958369wiv.4
 for <tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:18:16 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
 :cc:content-type;
 bh=3M3uRMuC1ouON7EGed8x7OyAfdpfsEqZYCxOrHEAczs=;
 b=HeJlbVFY08gX6TOo7WaDx6XnDHNE+mrdlni9bh+Pqc7OVOtmDLiuIMjY/QO4mNHGpM
 m0dRj2AsNlT+3781nRwxy+RbryczAsVVelPcnBeUqRQXZoh1tu+kn03oDNj+3rd5OVW0
 ubfaHefe+PhDM0DVDchsb96W4g+sfxZLLCJ4Yc7txxc3Hv79KDUD+PN2Q8JU51G84HlT
 M++sBR2fODP0EYJiNjjnq9g/8pGTf8DTQbBIjpVN5rZ9VhNVUan4GRMYyg5TIyhyn/Gy
 9OgFwQdqAPgLXAUmWiQx5WJt8nLP6MSIuEGBcGwcz7VStAnVel1NwQKIWCRzk2Oipvfq
 lwdw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.180.74.68 with SMTP id r4mr34132467wiv.33.1418681896488;
 Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:18:16 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.216.106.134 with HTTP; Mon, 15 Dec 2014 14:18:16 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20141215124255.AD6D4AE348@smtp.postman.i2p>
References: <548DFFB1.7000705@yahoo.com>
 <20141215032249.9FAE4AE322@smtp.postman.i2p>
 <20141215124255.AD6D4AE348@smtp.postman.i2p>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2014 17:18:16 -0500
Message-ID: <CAD2Ti2-SSRutCTshHA4FrEedYU1K9EVai_a_htjbEo4yrZfT_w@mail.gmail.com>
From: grarpamp <grarpamp@gmail.com>
To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
Cc: phantom-protocol@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: [tor-talk] phantom protocol
X-BeenThere: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
Reply-To: tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
List-Id: "all discussion about theory, design,
 and development of Onion Routing" <tor-talk.lists.torproject.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/tor-talk>, 
 <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/>
List-Post: <mailto:tor-talk@lists.torproject.org>
List-Help: <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk>, 
 <mailto:tor-talk-request@lists.torproject.org?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org
Sender: "tor-talk" <tor-talk-bounces@lists.torproject.org>

On Mon, Dec 15, 2014 at 7:42 AM, str4d <str4d@i2pmail.org> wrote:
> As far as the design goes, it is most similar to I2P's protocol. I
> have only read (most of) the original whitepaper[0] so far, and AFAICT
> at a high level it is almost identical to I2P, except for a few
> specific points (e.g. using IPv4 for identifying anonymizing paths,
> and bidirectional circuit-switched tunnels).

Yes the IPv6 interface is a specific point and a major feature. Like
CJDNS and OnionCat [1]... that gives the user access to whatever
apps they want to use over it, right out of the box. TCP, UDP, ICMP,
all of it, no problem. No porting, no waiting for someone to write an
app for the network from scratch, no need for socksv5.

I like forcing new dedicated apps (ideas) to appear [2], but not at the
expense of a variety of use / network adoption. Unless of course
the network is specifically designed for one thing. And with all
networks, using them securely is still up to the user as always.

[1] Tor-HS-v2 will break onioncat one-to-one addressing and thus be
no more useful than garlicat at that point. I think we need to come
up with *cat-v2 for those to regain one-to-one somehow.

[2] For example: I2P-Bote, Pond.

> It is an interesting protocol. I am reviewing the whitepapers, and
> intend to publish a comparison page on the I2P website[1] once I have
> a good understanding of the differences.

I'll add CJDNS somewhere when I can.
-- 
tor-talk mailing list - tor-talk@lists.torproject.org
To unsubscribe or change other settings go to
https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk

