You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
It'd be nice if peers could announce somehow an ordered / conditional list of preferential layers for peering.
I'm thinking:
Local-only peers could use this to announce that they're available as public peers, but only within geographical boundaries.
Conditional public peers could announce their existence for members of, for example, a hackerspace.
Public-public peers could announce themselves but indicate that they only accept peering over Tor, or Wifi, or IP-over-carrier-pigeon.
Public peers without preferences could simply point out that if you're living somewhere local, it'd be better to use a direct peering system than to tunnel over the clearnet: a peer might have an ordered list of preferences starting with "ethernet/cat6", then "wifi/band:channel", then "clearnet/ipv4", or something.
This would need RFCifying or standardisation, and because each interface might present differently, it might even require multiple peer entries, with a new key indicating applicability, geographical boundaries, or special conditions.
This might seem at first glance like a way of adding conditions to the public peering list that make it less useful, but I think conditions like these would actually make it easier to add a public peer without worrying about becoming an inappropriate global hub.
Of course, that would rely on people actually respecting the instructions given therein, so perhaps a way to announce a peer without actually providing peering credentials, and instead indicating an email address to ask, might also be needed to make it work in practice..
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
It'd be nice if peers could announce somehow an ordered / conditional list of preferential layers for peering.
I'm thinking:
This would need RFCifying or standardisation, and because each interface might present differently, it might even require multiple peer entries, with a new key indicating applicability, geographical boundaries, or special conditions.
This might seem at first glance like a way of adding conditions to the public peering list that make it less useful, but I think conditions like these would actually make it easier to add a public peer without worrying about becoming an inappropriate global hub.
Of course, that would rely on people actually respecting the instructions given therein, so perhaps a way to announce a peer without actually providing peering credentials, and instead indicating an email address to ask, might also be needed to make it work in practice..
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: