Re: [GNUnet-developers] social network WAS Re: gnunet over DTN (Delay-tolerant network)

[Christian Grothoff]

That's just saying "I'd do X", which is not useful.  We're aware of
those other protocols existence, I just personally don't see them having
advantages over our envisioned PSYC-based design.  But if you do, what
would be helpful is if you could articulate *why* you think PubSubHubbub
/ Salmon are better than PSYC.

On 03/07/2015 11:33 PM, Tom Sparks wrote:
> On 06/03/15 08:52, Christian Grothoff wrote:
> <sniped>
> 
> I just completed reading the social network paper (PYSC)
> 
> if I was design the social network for gnunet:
> 
> I would use Publish–subscribe system[1], a working floss example is
> PubSubHubbub[2][3]
> 
> for messages I would use the Salmon (protocol)[4][5] inside a atom feed
> 
> 
> 
> [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Publish%E2%80%93subscribe_pattern
> [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PubSubHubbub
> [3] https://code.google.com/p/pubsubhubbub/
> [4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salmon_%28protocol%29
> [5] http://www.salmon-protocol.org/
> 
> 
> ---
> tom sparks
> x86? We ain't got no x86. We don't need no stinking x86!
> 
> _______________________________________________
> GNUnet-developers mailing list
> address@hidden
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnunet-developers
>