I've been running frr (free range routing) for networking, using ospf layer 3 routing between my hosts. This allows dynamic routes to be populated throughout and makes a switched layer 2 network optional, since switches tend to be expensive and obnoxiously loud and a star topology is not necessary with a layer 3 network.
I like the Supermicro Xeon D boards because I can power 6 of them off a single power supply (the GPU cables can be converted to a 4 pin cpu).
I also use systemd-nspawn (w/ dnf --installroot or debootstrap) or docker to attach instances to the network, where each has it's own layer 3 address distributed by frr.
If I wanted to setup z-library on freenet, an example where reputation could be greatly enhanced by users of the service yet at odds with the legal system. Could the governed outweigh the influence of the government using the reputation system? Sorry for the silly information wants to be free argument, I know you've answered such questions ad inifinitum.
The reputation system is radical departure from freenet. This feels like a google search pagerank integrated with yelp, where you initially buy keywords from freenet.org, like a domain name purchase, and then other users add or subtract from your rating.
The other thing that is different is providing a multicast mechanism to subscribers of a service.
My memory is fuzzy, but I think the original freenet was pull based, where content was replicated around the network closer to the consumers of the data. I believe there was a well known key that signed the static content, so you could retrieve data using natural language. The well known key could be updated to point to any static content, so you could emulate push by polling the well known key and getting the latest version.
The new reputation mechanism must integrate with the subscription multicast in order to limit the abuse of the network. I'd be interested in a description on how this works.
It doesn't need a raft consensus algorithm, but corrosion does converge to a consensus, doesn't it? In the OSPF example, that does needs to converge to a state that is consistent and replicated on all the routers, otherwise loops and drops will occur. I'm curious if any convergence benchmark has been done that compares raft to corrosion.
My gut feeling with io_uring is that it wouldn't help as much with messaging applications with 100 byte request/reply patterns. It would be better in a with a pipelined situation, through a load balancing front end. I would love to be proven wrong, though.
I'm curious whether disabling the slow kernel network features competes with an tcp bypass stack. I did my own wrk benchmark [0], but I did not try to optimize the kernel stack beyond pinning CPUs and busypoll, because the bypass was about 6 times as fast. I assumed that there is no way the kernel stack could compete with that. This article shows that I may be wrong. I will definitely check out SO_ATTACH_REUSEPORT_CBPF in the future.
I like the Supermicro Xeon D boards because I can power 6 of them off a single power supply (the GPU cables can be converted to a 4 pin cpu).
I also use systemd-nspawn (w/ dnf --installroot or debootstrap) or docker to attach instances to the network, where each has it's own layer 3 address distributed by frr.