[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [GNUnet-developers] What's next (was: Fwd: Asymmetric load patch)

From: bmatheny
Subject: Re: [GNUnet-developers] What's next (was: Fwd: Asymmetric load patch)
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2002 10:27:50 -0500 (EST)
User-agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.8

I'm not sure how this fixes anything. The idea behind a standard packet size is 
that it makes doing any type of analytical attack on GNUnet much more 
If we could choose a random packet payload size (and it would have to be random 
to prevent traffic analysis) there is still a high chance that a 1500 byte 
packet could be chosen for sending, right? I personally like the idea of just 
'fixing' the queue mechanism as Christian suggested, but maybe that's not 


> As a bit of a compromise, what about makeing multiple packets sizes,
> say
> 500, 1000, 1500.
> Data is more likely to be in a 1500 Byte packet, but if this 1500 Byte
> packet could be occasionally be split up into a 1000 and 500 Byte
> packets
> then it would help to mix up the data and control packets.
> It might be difficult to split the 1500 Byte data packet because of
> the
> way the hash's are stored.... i dont know, just a thought.
> Glenn

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]