incubator-wave-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Michael MacFadden <michael.macfad...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Should we remove Federation? Wave as XEP/XMMP Extension
Date Thu, 21 Apr 2016 03:56:05 GMT
There was actually some research on this out of a French group.  I can try to find the reference.




On 4/19/16, 2:35 AM, "Yuri Z" <vega113@gmail.com> wrote:

>I was thinking about Federation via persistence level. In particular when
>all the content persisted into database, but the database is decentralized
>(like bitcoin blockchain). The content though is encrypted. Each wave is
>encrypted with a new key. Whenever a participant is added to the wave -
>whoever adds him also adds a new record into this user data wavelet with
>the wave private key that is encrypted with the user's public key. This way
>only the new user gets access the the wave private key.
>I.e. all the content is public, but encrypted. Only those that control a
>certain key can decrypt the message and add new content.
>So, this architecture follows the bitcoin model - anyone can host his own
>wave blockchain (like running his own wallet) or use a web wallet - i.e.
>wave client hosted by someone else.
>
>On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 12:24 PM Andreas Kotes <count@flatline.de> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 09:20:43PM -0700, Michael MacFadden wrote:
>> > However, with respect to a particular wave, the federation model is
>> > very much centralized.  It is not decentralized in the same way that
>> > XMPP and SMTP are.  This is actually a function of how the Wave OT
>> > algorithm works and not an issue with the transport or XMPP.
>>
>> I'd even say that's the correct way to do it. One server should feel
>> responsible for safeguarding the document regarding security and
>> availability.
>>
>> If a document is decentralized only, versions can diverge and copies
>> might go offline or disappear altogether, with the possibility of no
>> copy remaining.
>>
>> The transport as such shouldn't matter too much - although if we stay
>> in the Java/XML realm, XMPP sounds like a good fit, especially as (via
>> Jabber) it has a lot of established infrastructure.
>>
>> Maybe Apache Wave would even make a good set of (official) XMPP extensions?
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>>    count
>>
>> --
>> Andreas 'count' Kotes
>> Taming computers for humans since 1990.
>> "Don't ask what the world needs. Ask what makes you come alive, and go do
>> it.
>> Because what the world needs is people who have come alive." -- Howard
>> Thurman
>>


Mime
View raw message