On Wed, 24 Sep 2003, Justin Shore wrote:
On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 andrew2@one.net wrote:
Perhaps, but it also seems like moving an RBL onto a P2P network would making poisoning the RBL far too easy...
That's what I was getting ready to suggest. As it stands now we have at least somewhat of an assurance that the zone we're working with isn't tainted.
Web of trust, yada yada. Still distributed, still resiliant. And/Or, encrypt the zones/updates. Admittedly this is all off-the-cuff and I haven't given it much thought(scalability and performance issues immediately come to mind,) but it might be an interesting enough problem to sit down and research/think about at some point. It certainly would be interesting to find some more "substantially non-infringing" uses for P2P. /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\ Patrick Greenwell Asking the wrong questions is the leading cause of wrong answers \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/