GSoC 2015 to overcome NAT limitations?

[Chris Kerr]

On Tuesday 10 Mar 2015 12:30:03 David Stainton wrote:
> Your comment about leeching bandwidth is judgmental and incorrect. I
> store very small files on our Tahoe-LAFS onion grid. I recently was at
> the Tor developer meeting in Valencia, Spain and we (me and Leif Ryge)
> explained to some of the core Tor developers how this Tahoe-LAFS onion
> grid works... and none of them raised this concern.

Perhaps I did not express myself very well. I want to store several TB on 
Tahoe-LAFS nodes behind NATs. This is not a super-expensive high-tech exascale 
project; just a few Raspberry Pis with external hard drives, distributed 
around my friends' houses, total cost well under US$1000.
Your onion grid may well be small, but if I try to use Tor as a NAT-piercing 
technology then it means using on the order of 100 TB of bandwidth on the Tor 
network (connections to a .onion server go through six intermediate nodes; 
multiply that by the redundancy setting and add a bit more to account for 
downloading the data again and you have a factor of 20+ times the data being 
stored). I think using 100 TB of volunteers' bandwidth counts as leeching.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 473 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
URL: <http://tahoe-lafs.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/attachments/20150310/22758aae/attachment.pgp>