Oh, pleeeeease...
I already said why i dont like namecoin implementation, scroll up, down and go through links. So big holes in design - this can not grow in something significant.
Topic: DIANNA: the IANA Decentralized design concept - page 9. (Read 16104 times)
Having an alternate dns system is an important thing to secure bitcoins future against possible future dns shutdown attacks. even if its only to prevent these shutdowns from happening.
Why do you split forces and reinvent the wheel?
The only valid argument against namecoin is that domains are too cheap. and that is mostly because of the current lack of interest in the project. So just make marketing for namecoin or try to implement your fee algorithms to namecoin.
Namecoin works fine and is secure. I invite you to http://bitcoinX.bit
Why do you split forces and reinvent the wheel?
The only valid argument against namecoin is that domains are too cheap. and that is mostly because of the current lack of interest in the project. So just make marketing for namecoin or try to implement your fee algorithms to namecoin.
Namecoin works fine and is secure. I invite you to http://bitcoinX.bit
So we have two issues:
1. How to deal with Bitcoin overwhelming hash power
2. How to safely put a block inside distributed network
What if we try to kill both with one shot?
They summarize into one complex task. But the complex, difficult work - this is what network needs.
In addition to hashing work we will give miners a complex task to find a secure place for block inside our distributed network.
So they not only need to find a hash, but also they need to find a secure place in a huge network for solved block.
1. How to deal with Bitcoin overwhelming hash power
2. How to safely put a block inside distributed network
What if we try to kill both with one shot?
They summarize into one complex task. But the complex, difficult work - this is what network needs.
In addition to hashing work we will give miners a complex task to find a secure place for block inside our distributed network.
So they not only need to find a hash, but also they need to find a secure place in a huge network for solved block.
udpated initial post and wiki with current open issues
So a rebranded NameCoin ... why don't you just make available a patched NameCoin source-code with your perfect free-market fees formula in it and see if you can get the NameCoin network to adopt it naturally?
This design will actually destroy namecoin chain if applied. It is fundamentally different from namecoin. It is not NameCoin child, but NameCoin brother.Your wiki says :
... but where in the design document do you describe this "free market agreements mechanism"?
(As noted this is your main point of difference to NameCoin.)
Please read my paper before be opposed. Both your questions are described there. Quote
while DIANNA registration fee is defined by free market agreements
... but where in the design document do you describe this "free market agreements mechanism"?
(As noted this is your main point of difference to NameCoin.)
Domain transaction fee will be set by community like in later Bitcoin, when coinbase dropped to zero. Community will decide what lower and higher limit of fees are acceptable by network to get it live:
Quote
Also, this design addresses a crucial issue of setting an acceptable
commission for a domain transaction. It is established on a free market.
Free domain transactions (without linking TxC) are also possible, but their
duration will be depend on how altruistic the miners in the system are.
Transactions with unreasonably high commission are also possible. These
will bring about higher DDiff-s. In this case it will be up to the miners
themselves whether or not to include these transactions into a block,
depending on their hardware facilities. Perhaps such transactions will take a
long while to be completed, waiting while the general complexity reaches an
acceptable level.
All in all, compared to Bitcoin, this system will have a correcting factor
related to the computing difficulty. It will be proportionally tied to additional
financial activity regarding the domain transactions, and average domain
transaction commission as well. This latter value, in its turn, will be established
under free market conditions.
Domain transaction commissions will be returned to
proportionate bonuses for the additional processing undertaken.
minersn as It will be the free choice of the miners which will regulate the
proportionate nature of the additional complexity correction. The higher the
bonus, the higher the complexity – and the higher the risk to get nothing.
commission for a domain transaction. It is established on a free market.
Free domain transactions (without linking TxC) are also possible, but their
duration will be depend on how altruistic the miners in the system are.
Transactions with unreasonably high commission are also possible. These
will bring about higher DDiff-s. In this case it will be up to the miners
themselves whether or not to include these transactions into a block,
depending on their hardware facilities. Perhaps such transactions will take a
long while to be completed, waiting while the general complexity reaches an
acceptable level.
All in all, compared to Bitcoin, this system will have a correcting factor
related to the computing difficulty. It will be proportionally tied to additional
financial activity regarding the domain transactions, and average domain
transaction commission as well. This latter value, in its turn, will be established
under free market conditions.
Domain transaction commissions will be returned to
proportionate bonuses for the additional processing undertaken.
minersn as It will be the free choice of the miners which will regulate the
proportionate nature of the additional complexity correction. The higher the
bonus, the higher the complexity – and the higher the risk to get nothing.
FYI, Steve from BitPay recently proposed a method for decentralizing the DNS using bitcoin's blockchain instead of an alt chain: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/a-better-namecoin-63540
So a rebranded NameCoin ... why don't you just make available a patched NameCoin source-code with your perfect free-market fees formula in it and see if you can get the NameCoin network to adopt it naturally?
Your wiki says :
... but where in the design document do you describe this "free market agreements mechanism"?
(As noted this is your main point of difference to NameCoin.)
Your wiki says :
Quote
while DIANNA registration fee is defined by free market agreements
... but where in the design document do you describe this "free market agreements mechanism"?
(As noted this is your main point of difference to NameCoin.)
Just finished reading the paper. You have some very, very good ideas. One thing I will mention, is I encourage you to carefully consider the benefits of merged mining with Bitcoin before discarding the idea.
Namespaces-- It might be a good idea to have namespaces and allow for sub-namespaces. This way you could have one namespace per "service" (Tor, I2P, a new service in direct competition with ICANN addresses, etc), and then each service can have sub-namespaces which would be analogous with the TLDs we currently have with ICANN.
Namespaces-- It might be a good idea to have namespaces and allow for sub-namespaces. This way you could have one namespace per "service" (Tor, I2P, a new service in direct competition with ICANN addresses, etc), and then each service can have sub-namespaces which would be analogous with the TLDs we currently have with ICANN.
I think mergerd mining with Litecoin CPU mining would be a better idea then your not competing against anyone for users as there is no merged mining for CPU mining yet. So you would attract probally all or most Litecoin miners.
Just finished reading the paper. You have some very, very good ideas. One thing I will mention, is I encourage you to carefully consider the benefits of merged mining with Bitcoin before discarding the idea.
Namespaces-- It might be a good idea to have namespaces and allow for sub-namespaces. This way you could have one namespace per "service" (Tor, I2P, a new service in direct competition with ICANN addresses, etc), and then each service can have sub-namespaces which would be analogous with the TLDs we currently have with ICANN.
Namespaces-- It might be a good idea to have namespaces and allow for sub-namespaces. This way you could have one namespace per "service" (Tor, I2P, a new service in direct competition with ICANN addresses, etc), and then each service can have sub-namespaces which would be analogous with the TLDs we currently have with ICANN.
Man, I wish I knew how to program so I could help you somehow.
Anyway, if you need something translated into portuguese or help to promote it I may be able to help you. Beyond that, I dunno.
Thanks. If you are able to promote, please do it Anyway, if you need something translated into portuguese or help to promote it I may be able to help you. Beyond that, I dunno.
It would be better if more people will examine this design. I think a big question you will have to answer is how will you get it started. Initially the coins will have very little value, relying on people donating their time and hardware for very little reward (likely negative profit), and the initial size of the network will mean 51% attacks or general mayhem will be very easy to carry out. It's the same issue that plagues all alt coins.
This you said divides on three parts:1. The problem of initial demand. The initial demand for this system is in anonymous networks. Many-many people put their effords to invent similar system. Since it will work and lightweight client integrated in I2P, I sure ThePiratebay will be the first domain client. And this will be enough for big massmedia advertisement, like SilkRoad advertising bitcoin ))
2. The problem to motivate miners to mine. Its not a problem, I can mine by myself.
3. The main problem: 51% attacks. Here is a big field for thoughts. Either to use MM, which is totally alpha, or consider using more advanced cryptography which can deal with exponental network power growth.
I'm not entirely sure why the parallel separate currency is needed, either, since the part that is used to register already has its own value. Can't the registration fee itself be set by the domain buyers, and miners decide whether the fee is high enough? (Admittedly, I don't understand why Namecoin has fixed registration fees)
Separate currency needed to motivate miners to secure authoritative records and manage network. I don't see a clear way to connect Bitcoin currency chain with alternate key/value chain. Financial and key/value transactions need to be in one solid chain.
Refering to my document:
Quote
Domain transactions are similar to financial ones and exist because of them, because a
record verification is an action which requires payment to motivate the participants to process it.
Consequently, domain transactions as well as financial transactions will have commissions
associated with them.
It became clear from the BitDNS discussion and looking into NameCoin that we will need to
draw a line between domain and financial transactions. Processing each type of transactions is a
different activity with its own complexity and compensation.
Nevertheless, introducing an additional block sequence for domain transactions may bring
about problems with synchronizing the two block sequences together. Let me remind you here that
the financial block sequence is quasi-stable and a part of it can be rewritten by the system at any
time.
record verification is an action which requires payment to motivate the participants to process it.
Consequently, domain transactions as well as financial transactions will have commissions
associated with them.
It became clear from the BitDNS discussion and looking into NameCoin that we will need to
draw a line between domain and financial transactions. Processing each type of transactions is a
different activity with its own complexity and compensation.
Nevertheless, introducing an additional block sequence for domain transactions may bring
about problems with synchronizing the two block sequences together. Let me remind you here that
the financial block sequence is quasi-stable and a part of it can be rewritten by the system at any
time.
Man, I wish I knew how to program so I could help you somehow.
Anyway, if you need something translated into portuguese or help to promote it I may be able to help you. Beyond that, I dunno.
Anyway, if you need something translated into portuguese or help to promote it I may be able to help you. Beyond that, I dunno.
How about doing merged mining with Litecoin CPU mining then your not competing against NMC or anyone.
I don't cometing with anyone. I just want Internet to be free. Like speech.I need to research merged mining for considerations about its use.
I think a big question you will have to answer is how will you get it started. Initially the coins will have very little value, relying on people donating their time and hardware for very little reward (likely negative profit), and the initial size of the network will mean 51% attacks or general mayhem will be very easy to carry out. It's the same issue that plagues all alt coins.
I'm not entirely sure why the parallel separate currency is needed, either, since the part that is used to register already has its own value. Can't the registration fee itself be set by the domain buyers, and miners decide whether the fee is high enough? (Admittedly, I don't understand why Namecoin has fixed registration fees)
I do hope this idea gets developed. I'm just concerned it may not be able to start.
I just thought the solution to put full chain on DHT is very good
Found a doc about designing low-latency DHT.
pdos.csail.mit.edu/papers/dhash:nsdi/paper.pdf
One more research Anyone help? I do not going to own this project, it is a property of sociaty. And sociaty help needed.
Found a doc about designing low-latency DHT.
pdos.csail.mit.edu/papers/dhash:nsdi/paper.pdf
One more research
Anyone help? I do not going to own this project, it is a property of sociaty. And sociaty help needed. How about doing merged mining with Litecoin CPU mining then your not competing against NMC or anyone.
I don't competing with anyone. I just want Internet to be free. Like speech.I need to research merged mining for considerations about its use.
In what form are those rewards distributed? Some type of coin that lets them register more names (like in Namecoin)? Some alternate version of Bitcoin that only has use as a currency? Something else?
The DIANNA will have its own financial block chain like Bitcoin. If we cut the domain operations, it will function like Bitcoin cryptocurrency with its own block chain and own "coins".Those coins will be used also like alternate currecy.
Actually, DIANNA operates like NameCoin, but:
- registration fee is returned to miners (not destroyed) and caused additional proportional difficulty overhead to be not free
- registration fee defined by free market agreements, not by system. System can only suggest its value at first stages like bitcoin tx fee
- coins are not used as a domain name carrier
The registration fee of DIANNA's chain will be defined by communty like fees in "post-apocalyptic" Bitcoin (when coinbase dropeed to low values at lately stages).
Are there any considerations for database sizes? I've read somewhere (take with grain of salt) that the current ICANN DNS database is over 10 terrabytes in size. That's not something regular home users can support. Will this database/blockchain eventually have to be relegated to a few large centralized data storage places?
The first thing is yes, this will be heavy.The second is the words of Satoshi:
The networks need to have separate fates. BitDNS users might be completely liberal about adding any large data features since relatively few domain registrars are needed, while Bitcoin users might get increasingly tyrannical about limiting the size of the chain so it's easy for lots of users and small devices.
So the DIANNA won't be so popular due to big data sizes. Users will have to have a good hardware to run the full client.Although, the lightweight clients (i.e. DNS clients) are possible. They will just listen to network and do not write whole database, but only needed namespace.
However I already thought to put the full block chain to DHT database and on clients keep only reasonable its part, other part will represented only as headers. If client need a full block record which it hasn't, he queries DHT for it. Since client has a hash of this block, he can verify whether DHT returned valid block.
Are there any considerations for growth? The part that concerns me about Namecoin is that block rewards are constant for long periods of time, which means the maximum number of registrations per year is limited. Will your chain generate a decreasing reward like Bitcoin, level rewards (eg 50 per block) for ever, growing exponentially (3% increase every year to keep up with population/technology/other growth), or something else?
I think the Bitcoin emission model is fine. 50 coins means 5E9 "coin quantums". One coin is int64 = 1E8. I think this is totally fine. Correct me if I mistake.
How about doing merged mining with Litecoin CPU mining then your not competing against NMC or anyone.
Does anybody know how much power aux chain gets from parent chain? At least average?
NMC is roughly 40% of the BTC network ~4TH/s.
Quote
Maybe we just have to switch to another sort of cryptography functions, which use floating point for example? The MM smells bad for me, its like a parasite. Needs additional research.
Maybe you misunderstood me. The efficiency (or lack thereof) isn't what matters.
Say I have a 5970. I can earn 0.5 BTC per day with it. If performing proof of work for an alternative xCoin I can get 0.1 BTC (equivelent) per day then the xCoin network is asking me to forgo 0.4 BTC revenue to "help" xCoin.
Now lets abstract that further. A 5970 costs ~$400. $400 (and some time/skill) "buys" me 0.5 BTC per day in revenue. Now lets say xCoin works best on TI-85 graphing calculators. If $400 in calculators only nets me 0.1 BTC (equivelent) you are still asking me to take a lower return on my capital. How you perform the proof of work isn't all that important.
Not saying you should merge mine but you should look at the economics of it.
You choices really are:
New GPU optimized algorithm (directly competing against BTC daily revenue).
A new CPU based proof of work (since GPU miners have idle CPU)
Merged Mining GPU (SHA-256) proof of work
Merged Mining CPU (Scrypt) proof of work.
Just finished the paper. Some questions:
You mention a part of the system includes compensation/ rewards for miners. In what form are those rewards distributed? Some type of coin that lets them register more names (like in Namecoin)? Some alternate version of Bitcoin that only has use as a currency? Something else?
Will this allow for merged mining? (hit post, walked away, didn't see it didn't post due to new replies) Namecoin mining doesn't pay a high reward, but since it is bootstrapped to Bitcoin mining, mining Namecoin is essentially free, and any reward above 0, no matter how small, makes it still be worth it. The other benefit is thatwith MM, the mining infrastructure is already there, and it's HUGE, giving the alt chain instant protection against attacks. Starting from scratch would mean people would have to dedicate time and resources specifically to this, which, since the rewards wind won't have much value at the beginning, will mean that people mining at the start will pretty much have to all be volunteers.
Are there any considerations for database sizes? I've read somewhere (take with grain of salt) that the current ICANN DNS database is over 10 terrabytes in size. That's not something regular home users can support. Will this database/blockchain eventually have to be relegated to a few large centralized data storage places?
Are there any considerations for growth? The part that concerns me about Namecoin is that block rewards are constant for long periods of time, which means the maximum number of registrations per year is limited. Will your chain generate a decreasing reward like Bitcoin, level rewards (eg 50 per block) for ever, growing exponentially (3% increase every year to keep up with population/technology/other growth), or something else?
You mention a part of the system includes compensation/ rewards for miners. In what form are those rewards distributed? Some type of coin that lets them register more names (like in Namecoin)? Some alternate version of Bitcoin that only has use as a currency? Something else?
Are there any considerations for database sizes? I've read somewhere (take with grain of salt) that the current ICANN DNS database is over 10 terrabytes in size. That's not something regular home users can support. Will this database/blockchain eventually have to be relegated to a few large centralized data storage places?
Are there any considerations for growth? The part that concerns me about Namecoin is that block rewards are constant for long periods of time, which means the maximum number of registrations per year is limited. Will your chain generate a decreasing reward like Bitcoin, level rewards (eg 50 per block) for ever, growing exponentially (3% increase every year to keep up with population/technology/other growth), or something else?
Does anybody know how much power aux chain gets from parent chain? At least average?
Maybe we just have to switch to another sort of cryptography functions, which use floating point for example? The MM smells bad for me, its like a parasite. Needs additional research.
Maybe we just have to switch to another sort of cryptography functions, which use floating point for example? The MM smells bad for me, its like a parasite. Needs additional research.
Jump to: