[HN Gopher] Yggdrasil Network
___________________________________________________________________
 
Yggdrasil Network
 
Author : BSDobelix
Score  : 285 points
Date   : 2024-11-16 10:58 UTC (1 days ago)
 
web link (yggdrasil-network.github.io)
w3m dump (yggdrasil-network.github.io)
 
| poincaredisk wrote:
| >Yggdrasil is a new experimental compact routing scheme
| 
| Not that new anymore, right? It's at least 6 years old.
 
  | 1oooqooq wrote:
  | is anything using something similar?
 
    | jeanlucas wrote:
    | by the original comment logic, everything that is older than
    | 1 moment is not new anymore
 
      | poincaredisk wrote:
      | I wrote my comment, because I had to recheck if this is the
      | same Yggdrassil I've read about 5 years ago. When I read
      | about a new thing I also wonder will it be more popular in
      | the future, and knowing it's already many years old reduces
      | the chance of explosive growth in the future. At some point
      | things just... stop being new.
 
        | jeanlucas wrote:
        | I didn't mean to be mean to you, but in terms of network
        | protocols something can be a new approach for a while,
        | especially if others are still trying out. What is it
        | compared to? TCP/IP is past 50 years old.
        | 
        | Then again, I agree with you: it wasn't created
        | yesterday.
 
| fred_is_fred wrote:
| I get why the name was used but if you start a project that you
| want to be heavily adopted, please pick a simpler name. The
| complexity of spelling or pronouncing this for most people
| creates an actual barrier to adoption. MP3 was easy to say and
| tell your friends about, Ogg Vorbis was not.
 
  | opan wrote:
  | Ogg Vorbis seems very pronounceable to me, and without an
  | obvious wrong way to say it, using an english language
  | perspective.
  | 
  | Yggdrasil is a wild one, though, agreed. Better a unique name
  | than another thing called Gemini or Atom or something, though.
 
    | NemoNobody wrote:
    | No, Fred is right - it would better if it was atom or gemini,
    | that's literally what he is saying.
    | 
    | Yggdrasil - I just had to type the entire word out and even
    | then autocorrect didn't tell me I had a word. I think the Mp3
    | vs Ogg Vorbis is perfect analogy.
    | 
    | Tbh, I wouldn't use a Scandinavian language word for a global
    | application as it will automatically frustrate any English as
    | a second language users - the words defy practically all
    | rules of English, they frustrate me even as no matter if I
    | can read them, I often have no idea how to pronounce them
    | unless I've already heard them said.
    | 
    | This is one of those words I encountered many times before I
    | first heard it said and actually knew how to say it.
    | 
    | Fred is right 100
 
      | NemoNobody wrote:
      | Haha, I just realized I actually have used a Scandinavian
      | word in an app I intended for global use - I just respelled
      | the word so that it made sense in English.
 
      | anotherhue wrote:
      | To give a contrary opinion I think it's a beautiful world
      | and an excellent gateway to one of our greatest
      | mythologies. "The World Tree" is an aspect of human
      | literary history.
      | 
      | I'm not an ESL so I can only imagine the difficulties but I
      | do not think we should be robbing the world of beauty,
      | history and nuance for the sake of business English. Few
      | English speakers can spell or pronounce it correctly so it
      | even becomes a shared difficulty.
      | 
      | Fun fact: several names of days of the week come from Norse
      | mythology. Look up the names of the months if you want
      | something more modern.
 
        | F3nd0 wrote:
        | I have English as my second language and can't think of a
        | single reason why foreign words should frustrate me. On
        | the contrary, I feel like I have an advantage; since
        | English spelling/pronunciation is very messy, coming from
        | a language with more regularity (and just being
        | multilingual in general) probably just makes non-English
        | words feel more natural to me.
        | 
        | One anecdotal example is the name of 'GNU'. Somewhat
        | often, I see English speakers on the internet mock the
        | name for being difficult or odd to pronounce, and they
        | usually end up explaining it by writing 'guh-noo', which
        | somehow clarifies the matter. To me, 'GNU' reads
        | naturally, I find the official explanation 'like "grew"
        | but with an "n"' very clear, and I can't fathom how 'guh-
        | noo' can feel more clear or comfortable to anyone,
        | because to me it just looks utterly ridiculous. So for
        | deviating from English, I have a hard time seeing a
        | background in other languages as anything but an
        | advantage.
 
      | cma wrote:
      | On the other hand I've only seen the Yggdrasil project once
      | 3 or 4 years ago. The weird name and already visited link
      | on my hn feed.. I did a doubletake for maybe 1 second
      | thinking wtf is this and then immediately knew what it was
      | without clicking, in a way that I definitely wouldn't have
      | been able to if the project were named 'Atom.'
 
    | majoe wrote:
    | The English language has the habit of taking perfectly fine
    | Latin words and pronounce them in the most unintuitive way.
    | 
    | Gemini is actually a good example, I rather take Yggdrasil.
 
  | dizhn wrote:
  | mp3 is easy to say.. in English. "ogg" is much easier. i.e that
  | was not the reason.
 
  | prmoustache wrote:
  | I am pretty sure most of the world can figure out how to
  | ponounce yggdrasil much easier than how to pronounce
  | infrastructure or litterature in english.
  | 
  | https://youtu.be/RpCTu2ymqiM?feature=shared
 
    | NemoNobody wrote:
    | Not once they have familiarity with the language at all.
    | 
    | One of your examples has a word within a word, so it's like
    | half pronounced if you can say "structure" which I think
    | difficult to mispronounce.
 
      | poincaredisk wrote:
      | Every kid learning English in my country will pronounce
      | "structure" incorrectly at first, because it's similar to a
      | word (with the same meaning) in my native language, and the
      | correct English pronunciation of -ture doesn't make sense.
      | I've looked up Yggdrassil pronunciation and... it's not
      | surprising and I guessed the pronunciation correctly
      | already?
 
        | rustcleaner wrote:
        | >Yggdrassil
        | 
        | Yggdrasil
 
      | Tor3 wrote:
      | I've had English as my second language for many decades,
      | most of what I do every day is in English, nearly 100% of
      | what I read is in English, and most of what I watch or
      | listen to is in English. And I have to speak English with
      | all of my customers. English is, in that sense, absolutely
      | as easy as my native language. I dream in English. Still:
      | "Structure" and "literature" are hard to pronounce - or at
      | least I'm sure I don't pronounce those words the way
      | natives do. And that goes for a ton of words where the
      | letters aren't either pronounced, or, alternatively,
      | pronounced differently. But people with English as a second
      | language don't have much problems pronouncing non-English
      | words, like the Old Norse word in question. English is the
      | weird one here, not the other way around.
 
  | neilalexander wrote:
  | The name wouldn't necessarily stay if we succeed in our goals
  | and formally specify a protocol, but for now it hasn't really
  | been much of a barrier in terms of interest or experimental
  | deployments.
 
    | aspenmayer wrote:
    | I think it's probably too late to change at this point, and
    | changing it would probably not help in the ways you think.
    | Just look at the freenet/hyphanet retroactive name change
    | debacle by the original developer, for example, and how it
    | has caused needless confusion and churn in that community.
 
  | askvictor wrote:
  | I thought it was an knock-off brand sold on amazon
 
  | ravenstine wrote:
  | Or people can just learn to pronounce Yggdrasil. Then again,
  | how does it matter? If anything, an unusual name (relative to
  | Latin languages) is more memorable. If it was called "Dogshit"
  | I'd still use it.
 
| linsomniac wrote:
| I was pretty excited about it 3-4 years ago, but it seems like
| it's kind of an abandoned project at this point. Anyone making
| use of it and have any impressions?
 
  | DanAtC wrote:
  | There have been a few updates recently including a revival of
  | the iOS app which had languished for some time.
  | 
  | I use it as a VPN to connect my phone to my home network which
  | are both peered privately to a VPS.
  | 
  | It's a bit convoluted vs directly connecting to home, but it
  | was easier to set up than worrying about dynamic IPs, port
  | forwarding, and exchanging Wireguard keys.
  | 
  | Multicast peering is neat in that I can access my home server
  | directly using the same Ygg IP when I'm home. Problem is, I
  | have to use an IP; the iOS app doesn't support configuring a
  | custom DNS server for the Ygg VPN connection.
  | 
  | Headscale is really a better solution for this use-case, but
  | it's kind-of neat to know there's an alternative Internet
  | available with just an additional peering.
 
    | sunshine-o wrote:
    | Using Yggdrasil as a mesh VPN for your devices could be a
    | great use case.
    | 
    | From a quick search it seems you do not even need a static IP
    | address [0]
    | 
    | I am not familiar with Yggdrasil and can't wrap my hear
    | around how this is possible !
    | 
    | - [0] https://lemmy.sdf.org/comment/472679
 
      | scottyeager wrote:
      | To join the larger public Yggdrasil network, you need to
      | peer with at least one publicly reachable node. Most likely
      | that machine has a static IPv4 address. There are a number
      | of such nodes operated by volunteers, and they enable the
      | magic that allows any device to join the network and
      | immediately start receiving inbound traffic from the rest
      | of the network. By opening an outbound connection to the
      | public node, a channel is created for traffic to flow back
      | to the non public node.
 
      | ravenstine wrote:
      | This is what I do at home. That way I don't have to fiddle
      | with my router. This paid off in a way I didn't expect;
      | when I got TMobile home internet I found out the router has
      | almost no configuration, but all my devices could still be
      | reached via their IPv6 addresses on my private Yggdrasil
      | network.
 
    | mrbluecoat wrote:
    | Agreed. If the Yggdrasil Android and iOS apps supported zero-
    | touch MDM configuration like Tailscale, I'd try it out but my
    | guess is the performance still wouldn't match WireGuard.
    | 
    | Update: 83% comparitive speed using a US QUIC peer, not bad
    | actually...
 
  | neilalexander wrote:
  | Definitely not abandoned, but it's a free-time project for
  | myself and another developer. At the end of last year we
  | released version 0.5 with a new protocol design, and roughly a
  | month ago released 0.5.9 with link cost changes to dramatically
  | improve network latency.
 
    | linsomniac wrote:
    | Thanks for that update, you might want to post a quick blog
    | update because that was where I was looking to see what the
    | activity was. I get it about free-time projects, I have some
    | of those myself. Thanks for your work on this, it is
    | definitely very neat!
 
      | neilalexander wrote:
      | One or two others have also asked for a project update on
      | the blog so I'll be sure to draft something up soon! :-)
      | Thanks for your interest!
 
      | PhilippGille wrote:
      | Why would you not look at the code repo for checking
      | activity? There are so many active projects without regular
      | blog posts.
 
        | linsomniac wrote:
        | A reasonable question... In English we read left to right
        | and the "Blog" link was left of the "Github" link. :-)
        | And I just didn't think about it once I saw the most
        | recent blog post was from a year ago about an "upcoming
        | 0.5 release" and no update on the release. I'll admit, I
        | did a half-assed job.
 
  | evbogue wrote:
  | Yggdrasil just works, so there is less of a need for developers
  | to be in the chatroom discussing how to fix the problems with
  | it.
  | 
  | I use yggdrasil right now on all of my devices so I can ssh
  | between them even if they are behind NAT.
  | 
  | Using termux on android and the yggdrasil android app I can
  | access files located on my home computer while I'm on the go
  | without storing them in a cloud somewhere.
 
  | prurigro wrote:
  | I use it all the time to connect to my boxes at home when I'm
  | out and about, and I chat with friends on an IRC server running
  | on there.
  | 
  | Development is pretty active, and the latest release just
  | improved the routing algorithm by having it favour hops with
  | the lowest latency which had a noticeable improvement.
  | 
  | If you're looking for a big community hub within the network
  | you might be disappointed (you could always try to set one
  | up!), but there are a lot of people using it for their own
  | purposes and the protect is far from abandoned.
 
| hahajk wrote:
| Ok, so as I understand it, yggdrasil and cjdns are virtual P2P
| networks that offer the normal layer 3 routing services, but
| built on top of the existing internet. So they still require ISPs
| and internet backbones, etc.
| 
| Are there any projects attempting to build a worldwide P2P
| network that can replace the IP layer? Like a mesh network that
| can operate without verizon, cisco routers, etc? I know of some
| mesh network technologies aimed at small disconnected networks
| but nothing consumer-facing and supporting anything more than a
| few thousand nodes.
 
  | u8080 wrote:
  | There was cjdroute project with own OpenWRT-based Yggdrasil
  | firmware for routers. But it seems failed to gain traction and
  | died - https://habr.com/ru/companies/cjdns/articles/198428/ [in
  | Russian]
 
  | dartos wrote:
  | There's meshtastic, but it's not a full internet stack
  | replacement iirc
 
    | prurigro wrote:
    | It can do tcp/ip, but it's extremely slow. Like 5+ seconds
    | for a character to appear over ssh with a direct connection.
 
  | prussia wrote:
  | reticulum.network perhaps? It certainly fits the "replace the
  | IP layer" requirement, and I believe in theory it can be very
  | large scale, though unsure how it would do in reality.
 
  | fragmede wrote:
  | It's a very romantic notion, but there's a lot of resources
  | (time/money/hardware/effort) that go into the existing IP layer
  | that's totally invisible. Without a plan on how to supplant
  | those resources, any replacement network will struggle.
 
    | lambdaone wrote:
    | I think the idea here is that somebody else runs an
    | underlying IP layer, and this rides on top as an overlay
    | network.
    | 
    | You could, of course, run a local wireless IP layer and use
    | this to route, but peer-to-peer wireless has well-known
    | scaling problems.
    | 
    | Still, it looks like a very interesting and reasonably well
    | thoughout out idea.
 
  | Communitivity wrote:
  | There was the Locker project by Jeremie Miller (XMPP), but it
  | failed to gain traction and I think he pivoted into a more
  | small scale commercial effort with it IIRC. The telehash
  | protocol of Locker was extremely interesting.
 
  | bythreads wrote:
  | 6lowpan was also a pretty nice attempt at overcoming some of
  | the deficiencies - i think that operated on both lvl 2 and 3
 
  | ajsnigrutin wrote:
  | Why would you want to remove the IP layer?
  | 
  | Or are you thinking about IP layer, just not on the "internet",
  | but on a separate network? If this, then how do you suggest
  | connecting people together? Mesh becomes innefficient due to
  | mesh routing at larger sizes and sooner or later you just
  | reinvent "your own internet", but not worldwide, because you
  | don't have the resources to actually connect the whole world
  | together.
 
    | hahajk wrote:
    | In order to access the internet you are required to enter
    | into a contract with a corporate entity. That's not because
    | the internet is "theirs" (like Facebook's servers and systems
    | are Meta's), but because the network layer was design with
    | the assumption that companies would do the work of setting up
    | ISPs, core routers, peering agreements, etc.
    | 
    | I'd like to see a P2P protocol that doesn't assume this but
    | instead is designed to be completely decentralized, and
    | anyone running the protocol can join. This protocol would
    | provide addressing routing like our current IP protocol, and
    | TCP/UDP etc can run on top of it. Would this be a separate
    | "internet" or could it have gateways to the proper internet?
    | Preferably the latter. There are obvious technical challenges
    | with routing, addressing, mobility, all in a decentralized
    | way but are they truly impossible?
 
      | ajsnigrutin wrote:
      | It's not nearly like that, it's designed that you can build
      | your own, separate networks, before the concept of internet
      | providers even existed (and a few colleges and DoD were the
      | only users). It is completely decentralized (with the
      | exception of DNS, which can be decentralized easily, but
      | isn't).
      | 
      | Setting up networks is easy and cheap. the expensive part
      | is pulling cables and connecting people, that's why many
      | countries have the local governments do that. If you live
      | in an apartment building, you can easily create a separate
      | network for all the apartments. If you want to connect to
      | the next building, you'll need a lot more cables and
      | someone to actually dig in the cable or erect the poles and
      | use those to carry the cable... but who will pay for that?
      | What if you want to connect to the next city over... who
      | will pay for the cabling, digging etc? And of course, the
      | paperwork? Underseas cable? Good luck with that.
      | 
      | It's not a protocol problem, it's a cost problem.
 
      | DanAtC wrote:
      | Yggdrasil can do this but you have to bring the physical
      | layer.
 
      | toast0 wrote:
      | What you've described sounds a lot like running an AS with
      | BGP. Yes, there's centralized allocation of ASNs and IP
      | ranges. Otherwise, the whole thing is pretty decentralized,
      | but you've got to figure out how to connect to peers and
      | transit providers.
      | 
      | Many peers will connect without a real contract, especially
      | if you're both present on a peering fabric, but transit
      | usually needs a contract because transit isn't mutually
      | beneficial.
      | 
      | For some sort of overlay/alternative network, reliable
      | transit seems highly likely to have a cost too. Probably
      | not a contracted cost while it's experimental; and maybe
      | optimistically, much lower than today's costs for IP
      | transit, but still there would be a cost. Actually, IP
      | transit costs are much lower today than years ago, but last
      | mile transport costs are more important to your bill and
      | running wires requires skilled labor and specific capital
      | equipment, so it remains expensive; bandwidth capacity of
      | wiring increases over time, but you still need one
      | connection per home for best service; although wireless
      | seems poised to reduce costs for good enough service in
      | favorable conditions.
 
  | YesThatTom2 wrote:
  | IP was originally an overlay network on top of the telco
  | network.
  | 
  | That has many benefits most importantly it makes adoption easy.
  | 
  | Now we run telco networks over IP for legacy apps. If this
  | Yggdrasil stuff is successful, I presume eventually we'll run
  | IP over it for legacy systems.
 
  | rolph wrote:
  | mesh over a starlink like system, but i think he would want a
  | goodly sum for it.
 
  | progval wrote:
  | That was the original goal of cjdns, which is why it
  | automatically peers with other nodes reachable over Ethernet
  | (no IP needed), including WiFi (see the first paragraph of http
  | s://github.com/cjdelisle/cjdns/blob/master/doc/Whitepape...).
  | Unfortunately, its approach to routing turned out to not scale
  | in practice. Yggdrasil uses a different routing algorithm so it
  | might.
 
    | neilalexander wrote:
    | Yggdrasil was actually inspired in part by cjdns but the
    | design is very different. We care deeply about scale and we
    | want an Yggdrasil network to be able to grow organically
    | without requiring a strict hierarchy, huge amounts of state
    | etc. We're still working on it of course but for now the
    | public test network is somewhere around 5000-6000 nodes and
    | continues to work pretty well as it grows.
 
  | bityard wrote:
  | People have been dreaming of mesh networks forever.
  | Unfortunately they scale very poorly (among other issues) and
  | this is a fundamental limitation of their design. The Internet
  | (ARPAnet) started out as a mesh network and the concept of
  | trunks, backbones, and routing came about to solve those
  | scaling issues.
 
    | alexvoda wrote:
    | What are the reasons that make mesh networks scale poorly?
 
  | rapnie wrote:
  | Maybe Irdest [0] mesh network.
  | 
  | > Irdest is a networking research project that explores
  | different technologies and ideas on how to build more
  | sustainable, user-controlled communication networks.
  | 
  | [0] https://irde.st/
 
  | stackghost wrote:
  | Before cjdns a group of us started "project meshnet", inspired
  | by Athens[0], to essentially replace or supplant the Internet.
  | At the time it was an idealistic/anarchic response to the
  | Pirate Bay ruling back in 2009-2010. IIRC cjdns came a bit
  | later and subsumed most of the group.
  | 
  | Who knew that a bunch of disgruntled hackers and software
  | pirates building a shittier version of the Internet wouldn't
  | last?
  | 
  | [0]
  | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athens_Wireless_Metropolitan...
 
| PhilipRoman wrote:
| I really like the idea of address being derived from public key,
| but there is a problem with this approach - since Yggdrasil
| currently uses IPv6 addresses, the length is very limited and you
| can find collisions (there is a workaround which involves brute
| forcing a key with more leading bits). As I understand, the long
| term plan is adding a custom protocol which has no limits for
| address length.
 
  | Retr0id wrote:
  | My napkin math says it'd be plausible to generate a pair of
  | colliding addresses (birthday paradox etc.), but still
  | implausible to collide with the set of existing in-use
  | addresses. How much would the former actually matter, in the
  | context of Yggdrasil?
 
  | Its_Padar wrote:
  | Why not use the entire public key and let entropy do the rest,
  | like the Reticulum Network?
 
  | neilalexander wrote:
  | Truncating the public key to fit in an IPv6 address isn't
  | totally ideal, agreed, but for now it means that just about any
  | existing IPv6-capable application will work over Yggdrasil
  | without modification, which is a nice property for a testnet.
 
    | Retr0id wrote:
    | What about truncating a hash of the whole public key? (what's
    | what I'd assumed was happening already)
 
| Its_Padar wrote:
| Something else in this space includes the Reticulum Network Stack
| https://reticulum.network/
 
| foundry27 wrote:
| The first thing I tried to find on their website and their GitHub
| was a protocol specification, to be able to implement it
| independently from the reference implementation. I thought this
| would be straightforward since it's advertised as a
| scheme/protocol, but such a spec isn't referenced anywhere!
| Digging on my own I eventually found [1] on a side-branch of one
| of their other GitHub projects.
| 
| Kudos to the author: I think it actually covers a _lot_ of what
| you'd need to know: crypto identities, message formats, wire
| protocols, peering and stream semantics, spanning tree updates
| and root selection, the DHT, forwarding logic, sessions, etc. A
| couple things are TODOs like how to verify and sign root updates,
| and there's some ambiguity in the tiebreaker algorithm for next-
| hop selection.
| 
| It seems to be very tightly coupled to TCP as the transport layer
| though, since all packets need to be delivered reliably and in
| the order they were sent, and need to be capable of being
| fragmented into smaller packets for varying MTU sizes.
| 
| [1] https://github.com/yggdrasil-network/yggdrasil-
| specs/blob/ys...
 
  | neilalexander wrote:
  | We did spend a little bit of time documenting the earlier v0.3
  | protocol, as you have linked, but the protocol has changed
  | significantly in design twice since then. v0.4 changed the DHT
  | quite a bit and v0.5 removed the DHT altogether. As a research
  | project it likely will continue to change until we settle on a
  | design we are happier with, at which point we will definitely
  | spend more time documenting it.
  | 
  | The need for ordered/reliable links is mostly for convenience
  | of development at this stage, but that can be fixed for sure.
 
    | Rhapso wrote:
    | Look at https://arxiv.org/pdf/1502.06461 if you want to try a
    | chord dht again.
    | 
    | Kademlia is a lot less intuitive, but by not ever assuming
    | it's tables are correct, it handles and corrects
    | inconsistency (and malicious nodes) better.
    | 
    | Chapter 6 of this pile of (my) crap
    | https://scholarworks.gsu.edu/cs_diss/106/ talks about doing
    | latency optimization on dht routing. Basically just embedding
    | then network graph into a metric space.
 
    | godelski wrote:
    | Some documentation can help with those issues though. I find
    | it helps more because you're writing to yourself why you're
    | making certain decisions and it helps when you decide to make
    | others. It just so happens that it's also a great way to
    | onboard people.
 
  | colordrops wrote:
  | Is coupling with TCP a problem? Does it do anything that goes
  | against their goal of full decentralization?
 
    | macawfish wrote:
    | Makes it hard to do hole punching I think? At any rate,
    | direct connections currently cannot be established between
    | multi-hop peers, traffic gets routed through peers instead. I
    | think this has something to do with the TCP choice.
 
      | foundry27 wrote:
      | Yeaaah. TCP hole punching is goofy and unreliable, last I
      | checked. You have to do some arcane ritual of having both
      | peers start a three-way handshake to each others's public
      | endpoints simultaneously, relying on NATs to accept inbound
      | SYN packets if they match the outgoing SYN. And nobody's
      | NAT devices implement simultaneous-open the same way, so
      | all your connections just fail.
      | 
      | Naturally this leads to slapping even more arcane fixes on
      | top of that, like NAT port assignment oracles to
      | adversarial interoperate with different port allocation
      | strategies (random, sequential, single, etc.) by analyzing
      | patterns in previous port assignments. Networking sucks.
 
        | beeflet wrote:
        | https://xkcd.com/2044/
 
        | paulddraper wrote:
        | Actuate
 
        | ionspin wrote:
        | I presume you meant to say "Accurate", but it made me
        | think of a off-brand Picard that says "Actuate" instead
        | of "Engage".
 
        | gtirloni wrote:
        | If the new technology referenced in the comic provides a
        | way to securely connect, including auditing, I don't see
        | how it applies to the hole punching hack.
 
      | Karrot_Kream wrote:
      | I think this is a pragmatic choice. NAT Hole Punching can
      | be hit or miss no matter the method but doing peer routing
      | guarantees even a client that can only initiate outbound
      | connections can route packets. It can be slow though.
      | 
      | I also know there's support for other transports like QUIC
      | but TCP is the main default.
 
      | AyyEye wrote:
      | > At any rate, direct connections currently cannot be
      | established between multi-hop peers, traffic gets routed
      | through peers instead. I think this has something to do
      | with the TCP choice.
      | 
      | Yggdrasil is designed for physical links and multi-hop
      | routing first and foremost. Internet peering is just a way
      | to test/use/join the network until then.
 
        | macawfish wrote:
        | I'd love if my private nodes could peer directly so I
        | wouldn't need to route all traffic through my budget VPs.
 
        | wolletd wrote:
        | If only there was some technology that would allow every
        | peer to have its globally unique address, making direct
        | connections only a matter of firewalls.
        | 
        | I don't know, something like IPv4, but with more
        | addresses...
 
| A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote:
| FAQ >> Is Yggdrasil anonymous? No, it is not a goal of the
| Yggdrasil project to provide anonymity.
| 
| I understand that the problem is hard, has its own set of issues
| to solve beyond just technical, but this honestly makes it a non-
| starter for me. Anything that would be an actual internet
| evolution would need to include actual anonymity. Apart from
| this, I simply do not see what problem it actually solves for the
| existing internet that is not already solved with the current
| setup.
 
  | neilalexander wrote:
  | Anonymity isn't a goal for Yggdrasil anymore than it is a goal
  | for for BGP, OSPF, BATMAN etc. Anonymous networks also
  | generally have very high costs/overheads as they often engineer
  | long and indirect paths for obscurity. See the generally poor
  | performance/reliability of Tor circuits for an example of why
  | we probably wouldn't want the entire Internet to work this way.
 
  | ravenstine wrote:
  | Why? I think it makes perfect sense to focus on a mesh routing
  | protocol and make anonymity something optional that you can lay
  | on top of it. No reason you can't run a Yggdrasil network and
  | have an I2P network within it. This way there isn't as much of
  | a performance hit for communications that don't call for
  | anonymity, and anonymous peers can be established without being
  | on the clearnet.
 
  | cma wrote:
  | Optimized latency can deanonymize, so better to layer
  | anonymization on top.
 
| pjmlp wrote:
| And me thinking it was a Linux distribution.
| 
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yggdrasil_Linux/GNU/X
 
| omani wrote:
| something else in this space includes (New Kind of Network) NKN.
| (https://nkn.org)
 
| jcmontx wrote:
| I don't know a lot about networking. Where does this stand in the
| networking layers? Transport? Network?
 
| myspeed wrote:
| Sounds like Teredo tunnels which was part of Windows 7. It builds
| ipv6 tunnel over ipv4 and assigns a global IPv6 address to
| Windows machines. But these tunnels were later removed from
| Windows 10.
 
| varunnrao wrote:
| This is not a technical point but does anyone know which font was
| used to typeset the logo? It looks really nice and clean.
 
| epapsiou wrote:
| 50 comments and no one mentioned Treeship or Hyperion!!
 
  | gautamcgoel wrote:
  | Yeah, this is what I was thinking! The Templars would be so
  | disappointed...
 
| block_dagger wrote:
| Came in thinking this was an extension for the game Valheim.
| Different yggdrasil apparently.
 
  | jeroenhd wrote:
  | Yggdrasill is a name from Norse mythology. It's the tree along
  | which the nine worlds were believed to exist.
 
| dang wrote:
| Related:
| 
|  _Yggdrasil Network_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41669625 - Sept 2024 (3
| comments)
| 
|  _Yggdrasil P2P mesh E2EE IPv6 network_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30156551 - Jan 2022 (77
| comments)
| 
|  _Yggdrasil - Early-stage implementation of an end-to-end
| encrypted IPv6 network_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27577201 - June 2021 (102
| comments)
| 
|  _Show HN: Yggdrasil Network - compact mesh routing experiment
| for mesh networks_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18863554 - Jan 2019 (15
| comments)
| 
|  _Announcing Yggdrasil Network v0.3_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18751991 - Dec 2018 (3
| comments)
| 
|  _Yggdrasil: End-To-end Encrypted IPv6 Networking_ -
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18666245 - Dec 2018 (1
| comment)
 
| coppsilgold wrote:
| If you want an actual mesh p2p IP-network that can punch through
| firewalls/NATs you can use Tailscale/Headscale
| 
| If you want a crypto-key addressable p2p connection-network there
| is a somewhat recent project which does this rather well:
| 
| https://www.iroh.computer
| 
| It punches through firewalls/NATs and establishes QUIC
| connections.
| 
| They have two already useful PoC's:
| 
| https://github.com/n0-computer/sendme
| 
| https://github.com/n0-computer/dumbpipe
 
| beeflet wrote:
| Still reading about this. Something strange is that ygg addresses
| are made to fit in ipv6 using the hash of a pubkey. How does
| vanity mining lead to any security benefit?
| 
| Why not just make a new TLD like .onion or .i2p and use base32?
 
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-11-17 14:00 UTC)