Open Standard

[Gunni]

Even if you do not want to make Bittorrent Bleep open source, how about making it an open standard, a standard anyone can implement and use and be completely compatible with your Bleep client.

 

That way it can flourish like the Bittorrent protocol did when it was made into an open, public standard that anyone could use, mess with and implement.

 

I realize doing so might mean you think you lose control of the protocol, and you might even think it's not secure enough yet, but that's fine, just say so when you do release it!

 

For example, you could release the current protocol, call it alpha or version 0.1 or something, that way you can receive tips from the community about improvements, suggestions on how to do things better, security problems that you may not have otherwise not found before they were exploited.

 

Others might even make a new version of your protocol, which does something differently, or better than your current protocol, that way you could adopt those changes or ignore them.

 

Making things open makes things better!

 

At least that is my opinion.

 

co'o ro do

[GreatMarko]

@Gunni, please see this post and the links therein - the bleep "client" is just a front-end to a separate "engine"

[Gunni]

@Gunni, please see this post and the links therein - the bleep "client" is just a front-end to a separate "engine"

My suggestion still stands, make the protocol/engine, what ever it is called, an open standard.

 

See my post for explanation.

[Guest arvid]

I'm hoping that we can publish the full protocol specification. We are leveraging the new BitTorrent  DHT put/get feature, as documented here: http://libtorrent.org/dht_store.html

 

On top of that we have a light weight lossy datagram transport protocol with some interesting crypto properties. primarily forward secrecy and authentication based on public keys known in advance. It's using the primitives provided by libsodium.