mirrors/yggdrasil-go
2
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/yggdrasil-network/yggdrasil-go synced 2024-11-09 15:10:26 +03:00
Code Issues Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Update README.md

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Neil Alexander 2019-03-13 20:12:08 +00:00
parent 7478c8ba2b
commit e582ac102b
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: A02A2019A2BB0944
1 changed files with 2 additions and 23 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

25
README.md
View File

@ -103,30 +103,9 @@ repository within `doc/yggdrasil-network.github.io`.
- [Frequently asked questions](https://yggdrasil-network.github.io/faq.html)
- [Admin API documentation](https://yggdrasil-network.github.io/admin.html)
## Performance
## Community
A [simplified model](misc/sim/treesim-forward.py) of this routing scheme has
been tested in simulation on the 9204-node
[skitter](https://www.caida.org/tools/measurement/skitter/) network topology
dataset from [caida](https://www.caida.org/), and compared with results in
[arxiv:0708.2309](https://arxiv.org/abs/0708.2309). Using the routing scheme as
implemented in this code, the average multiplicative stretch is observed to be
about 1.08, with an average routing table size of 6 for a name-dependent scheme,
and approximately 30 additional (but smaller) entries needed for the
name-independent routing table. The number of name-dependent routing table
entries needed is proportional to node degree, so that 6 is the mean of a
distribution with a long tail, but this may be an acceptable tradeoff (it's at
least worth trying, hence this code). The size of name-dependent routing table
entries is relatively large, due to cryptographic signatures associated with
routing table updates, but in the absence of cryptographic overhead, each entry
should otherwise be comparable in size to the BC routing scheme described in the
above paper. A modified version of this scheme, with the same resource
requirements, achieves a multiplicative stretch of 1.02, which drops to 1.01 if
source routing is used. Both of these optimizations are not present in the
current implementation, as the former depends on network state information that
appears difficult to cryptographically secure, and the latter optimization is
both tedious to implement and would make debugging other aspects of the
implementation more difficult.
Feel free to join us on our [Matrix channel](https://matrix.to/#/#yggdrasil:matrix.org) at `#yggdrasil:matrix.org` or in the `#yggdrasil` IRC channel on Freenode.
## License