I never could get Nix working but maybe someone will
Wireguard is p2p.
EDIT: I guess the point is it’s doing peer discovery without static public IPs or DNS. Pretty cool!
Interesting, it’s on AUR, I will try it.
So it doesn’t need any port forwarding, and works on CGNAT? How the “NAT hole punching” works? Both clients connect to something on IPFS?
Afaik, for DHT with torrent, clients need to know at least one tracker, what is the “tracker” here? Something on IPFS? Who am I sending my IP addresses?
How much overhead does this add to speed? I love with Wireguard, that it’s barely noticeable, really close to p2p speeds, OpenVPN was awful in this regard.
First off great find. I didn’t think to check the AUR. I personally wouldn’t use it as that version is 3 years out of date but its existence means that it might be entirely possible to get a non Nix version. I’m not sure I fully understand why it needs Nix OS but what do I know.
It is all libp2p magic
There have been lots if talks on libp2p and Nat traversal. I suggest you check them out. How it actually works is pretty complex and requires someone more knowledgeable than me to explain. One way it works is that both devices start a TCP connection at the same time which gets the proper ports to open up.
AUR packages ending with"-git" or “-svn” always pull the latest commit from source. The version number means that was the last time the packager had to change something on the PKGBUILD script, not the actual version which would be installed.
Where should I look? Where were these talks? I’m interested.
Edit: I found the whitepaper about hole punching: https://research.protocol.ai/publications/decentralized-hole-punching/
It says it connects to a “Hole Punch Coordination (DCUtR - Direct Connection Upgrade through Relay)”. So for NAT traversal to work, you need a third party, this relay. As I expected. I guess you can self host this, but than you could just host a wireguard server. I guess if you are on a locked down network where you cannot connect to any relay (e.g. how the Chinese Great Firewall works technically they could block it) you can’t initiate a connection behind a NAT.
Nonetheless it seems interesting, but no magic here. Maybe the big difference that the relay servers are distributed, so no central authority to block easily.
DHT is autonomous and does not require a tracker. Usually it is only used as a fallback as a regular tracker is quicker. It’s p2p, and is split accross people hosting it.
What about Tailscale? I know it’s Proprietary software, but still.
Tailscale is actually a lot more open than you think. The agents are all foss and there is a self hostable version.
Tailscale… is not that good. The underlying wireguard is robust, but tailscale control plane is completely proprietary, as well as their DERP servers that it too often uses completely needlessly. They can also block you off from downloading it, updating, or logging in, if you happen to be in a wrong country.
I’m myself looking for an alternative to it, but having trouble finding something I could share with non tech savvy friends while not being as complex on my end as, say, open/strongswan ais. Any suggestions welcome.
https://netbird.io/ maybe?
I use zerotier personally
Sounds relatively similar to Yggdrasil
Is this made by the same guy who does hyprland?
YAML?? (╯°□°）╯︵ ┻━┻)
what: is: your: - problem - with: YAML # At least you can have comments unlike in json. Who need comments in a config file anyway.Nothing too major about how it’s usually used, but the yaml spec does allow arbitrary code execution when parsing a file and relies on the parser to have that feature disabled: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/YAML#Security
That’s why for python,
yaml.save_load()is a thing. That’s fine for your local config files and may even be a feature for you, but it shouldn’t be used to exchange information between services.My general view is similar, yaml is better if it should be written by humans, json is better if it should be written and read only by a machine. but hyprspace uses json for configuration, so I don’t really understand cellardoor’s comment
Yeah I agree. Although recently I’ve become partial to toml… In the end I’ll use what’s common in the ecosystem I’m developing in
*but relies on IPFS.
Useless.
Why is it useless?
Lol. You checked on IPFS lately? Different times. Different world.
Do you have more information? Haven’t looked into it for a while. What happened?
IPFS is like a dead Multiplayer game, or an Onion network. Check it out.
That which is asserted without evidence may be dismissed without evidence.
Go ahead and try to use it then.
That’s the funniest thing about this whole conversation: I do. Quite regularly. It works fine. Better than HTTP for my usecase. No clue what the fuck you people are on about.
Didn’t realize we all were now incapable of looking out the window. That seems like something an absolutely incapable person would do because they’re way too lazy.
Is IPFS something your family and friends check on regularly? I don’t even know what it is.
Considering your reluctance to give any information about your assertion that such a project using it becomes useless, I’m not sure you know what it is either :P
I haven’t checked it out in years. From my understanding, IPFS aims to be a distributed filesystem that kinda works like Bittorent. If you access a file, you then seed it. Last time I checked it out, the project was jumping on the crypto bandwagon… Just checked out their website now, and don’t know WTF it is.
It relies on libp2p not ipfs. ipfs uses libp2p as its transport
“A Lightweight VPN Built on top of IPFS + Libp2p”
Seems like both at a glance
Tell me what I’m misunderstanding here.
So I dug into the source code a bit to see how it’s used. It turns out that IPFS might actually optional, as per the log line on https://github.com/hyprspace/hyprspace/blob/master/p2p/node.go#L213 (“Getting additional peers from IPFS API”)
The list of required bootstrap peers is hardcoded in the same file, but a few lines above, specifically at https://github.com/hyprspace/hyprspace/blob/master/p2p/node.go#L181
I say might be because - while the required bootstrap peers include a bunch of ones based on bootstrap.libp2p.io - there is a long list of hardcoded ip addresses and I don’t recognize any of them.
So those might be libp2p.io ip addresses, but they might also be IPFS ip addresses, or even belong to someone else altogether. (Edit: There are WHOIS tools online like https://lookup.icann.org/en that can be used to look these up and figure out who they belong to if you are really curious, but I can’t be bothered to do that right now.)
In any case, it looks like the way this works is that from a peer, libp2p tries to look up additional peers, and so on. So at most IPFS would be used as a way to get a listing, but once the desired peer is found, IPFS is cut out of the picture for that particular connection and NAT hole punching is used to establish a direct connection between peers instead (as per the linked wikipedia article, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hole_punching_(networking )
