IPv8: Authenticated Private P2P Communication

Re:IPv8: Authenticated Private P2P Communication by pythonaut_16 on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @03:43PM (#26242626)

Calling this IPv8 seems pretty irresponsible when it is not an IETF standard in any way.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:IPv8: Authenticated Private P2P Communication by imoverclocked on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @03:54PM (#26242727)

So much this. Please don't call this IP. We already have an Internet Protocol and this project seems to work as a layer on top of it, much like a P2P-VPN.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:IPv8: Authenticated Private P2P Communication by synctext on Friday February 26, 2021 @03:32AM (#26272576)

Details and explanation in this expired IETF Internet Draft: https://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-pouwelse-trustchain-01.html

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:IPv8: Authenticated Private P2P Communication by ACAVJW4H on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @04:10PM (#26242927)

Like calling your own totally independent and unrelated implementation of a neural network yolo.v5 This is just clickbait.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:IPv8: Authenticated Private P2P Communication by omginternets on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @05:59PM (#26244161)

This, along with the lack of an RFC (see my top-level comment) seals my judgement of this project as mere content marketing.

IMHO, the libp2p specifications [0] are much more interesting.

[0] https://libp2p.io/

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:IPv8: Authenticated Private P2P Communication by LargoLasskhyfv on Wednesday February 24, 2021 @01:30PM (#26253641)

Maybe they mean layer 8 ;)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:IPv8: Authenticated Private P2P Communication by abvdasker on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @03:54PM (#26242736)

I find it funny and irreverent. There probably never will be an IPv8 so there's no need to worry about a naming conflict.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:IPv8: Authenticated Private P2P Communication by wyldfire on Tuesday February 23, 2021 @04:06PM (#26242883)

I'm all for funny names but this one seems like it would just cause more confusion than it's worth. The fact that they list it as the sole FAQ probably means that many folks have been confused.

I hereby request that they change the project name to one of the not-too-perilous-but-frequently-selected-references-to-Monty-Python for a very silly name indeed.

[ Parent | on HN ]