/[storm]/storm/doc/pegboard/attacking_gisp--hemppah/peg.rst
ViewVC logotype

Diff of /storm/doc/pegboard/attacking_gisp--hemppah/peg.rst

Parent Directory Parent Directory | Revision Log Revision Log | View Patch Patch

revision 1.34 by hemppah, Fri Jun 13 13:12:32 2003 UTC revision 1.35 by hemppah, Mon Jun 16 08:49:08 2003 UTC
# Line 168  Additionally, the current version of GIS Line 168  Additionally, the current version of GIS
168  - The current implementation does not support "free choice"  - The current implementation does not support "free choice"
169  - Future versions may include "peer strength" feature (a peer decides  - Future versions may include "peer strength" feature (a peer decides
170    whether to put it an another peer in its routing table or not)      whether to put it an another peer in its routing table or not)  
171    - GISP maintains cache information about 10000 peers (max) whereas Chord
172      caches information about 1000 peers (max)
173      
174  The assumption for the results above is that the system is "in the steady state",  The assumption for the results above is that the system is "in the steady state",
175  according to the authors.  according to the authors.
176    
# Line 230  questions. Line 232  questions.
232    
233  Hypothesis:  Hypothesis:
234    
235  - GISP has an obvious exploit, if a hostile peer is able to behave like "dumb"  - GISP has a exploit, if a hostile peer is able to behave like "dumb"
236    peer. More specifically, a hostile peer answers to "SEEN" messages in the    peer easily. More specifically, a hostile peer answers to "SEEN" messages in
237    network, but no dot perform requested operations, e.g., do not provide    the network, but no dot perform requested operations, e.g., do not provide
238    a "RESULT" message for a "QUERY" message. This behaviour allows other peers    a "RESULT" message for a "QUERY" message. This behaviour allows other peers
239    to maintain hostile peers in their routing tables while still hostile    to maintain hostile peers in their routing tables while still hostile
240    peers are able to cause problems to the network's operation. "SEEN", "RESULT"    peers are able to cause problems to the network's operation. "SEEN", "RESULT"
# Line 243  Hypothesis: Line 245  Hypothesis:
245  - In the GISP overlay, the average routing hop length is proportional to  - In the GISP overlay, the average routing hop length is proportional to
246    O(log n).    O(log n).
247        
248  - In a GISP network, when fraction f of the peers are "dumb" and a "dumb"  - In a GISP network, when fraction f of the peers are "dumb" and a "dumb" peer
249    peer do not provide a "RESULT" message for a "QUERY" message, the    do not provide a "RESULT" message for a "QUERY" message, the probability of
250    probability of routing successfully "QUERY" message between two regular    routing successfully "QUERY" message between two regular peers is (1-f)^h-1,
251    peers is (1-f)^h-1, where h is the routing hops used in the overlay.    where h is the routing hops used in the overlay.
252    
253        
254            

Legend:
Removed from v.1.34  
changed lines
  Added in v.1.35

savannah-hackers-public@gnu.org
ViewVC Help
Powered by ViewVC 1.1.26