rns.recipes

do you guys think it would be useful having some sort of domain name system for nomadnet, or for the ecosystem in general? i don't really like dns as it is on the regular internet - seems like it's suffered a bit of scope-creep - but i do think it's useful being able to assign memorable names to addresses.

p.s. written by a human, i promise those en dashes are my own

after thinking about it some more, i reckon it's better to NOT have a domain name system.

the main complexity is that of registering and un-registering domain names. there would need to be some sort of central authority, which is not ideal, and some sort of incentive to un-register when you're done with a domain name.

instead, i think it would better to provide a registry which allows users to label certain addresses on their own machine, and it only affects them. so if they have a friend, or a site they visit frequently, they can make it easier for themselves by creating a short name for it.

I've been thinking about how DNS-like system based on local social trust (instead of global authoritarian one) could work. I've arrived to this concept: https://github.com/mpuromaki/rds

It's imho quite interesting take on how to create local clusters for name resolution which can gossip between each other without actually needing to spam announces everywhere. If anyone wants to discuss about this, I'd be delighted.

Now to disclaimer: I'm just starting my reticulum journey. For now I've done more reading than doing and for "RDS" there is no implementation to test out. If something like that has been discussed before I'd like to hear about that too, even if just to avoid wasting more time.

it's not a bad idea, but you've basically re-invented dns from first principles there. you can self-host a dns server and assign whatever names you want, it just means that nobody else (unless they've set you as their only nameserver) will see those names.

the thing i don't like about dns is that there are all sorts of different record types (e.g. A, AAAA, TXT, CNAME, SRV, and so much more). but dns should be purely for name->addr mapping in my opinion.

your idea could even be complimentary to the idea i had above. for example, if a user just wants to make their own labels, then we should make it really easy for them to self-host a nameserver. then they only have to write it once and it's shared across devices, and they can even service their friends and family if they want.

in your rds spec you mention the idea of having rds servers communicate with each other. i don't think that's desirable. if i'm writing my own list of names, i don't really care what other people's names are, and i don't want my rds server talking to theirs.

In effect prior work is the [aliases] section in rngit config:
https://reticulum.network/manual/git.html#identity-destination-aliases

And the aliases file in Dacar:
https://github.com/bergie/dacar/blob/main/SPEC.md#135-aliases--rnns-text

But both of these are user-driven, "I want to call identy X with name Y", and only utilized by that particular tool.

To further tag along, the manual talks about a future state with network identities being part of a distributed DNS system: https://reticulum.network/manual/understanding.html#network-identities. @bergie, I have not used that yet, but it seems a lot like a host file, right?

Lucas wrote:

@bergie, I have not used that yet, but it seems a lot like a host file, right?

Very much so. Even there some way to distribute it between your own machines is nice. But as long as this is files, rncp, rngit, or something like fsync/syncthing are always possible.

In nomadnet, I can save sites which is kind of like a bookmark. I would like to export a "node list/bookmarks" so I could import them into different browsers. I have not looked to see how sites are currently saved... maybe there is an easy way?

Puro wrote:

I've been thinking about how DNS-like system based on local social trust

Wow wow let me stop you there :)

I could just write “Zooko's triangle” (dated 2001) and be done, but hey.

I read your document and started a 10 pager essay in response demonstrating why what's proposed inside of it, and any attempt at "decentralized DNS", or for that matter attempts at “convenience extensions” of any decentralized network are in my experience, terrible ideas in general.

I refuse to use LLMs and the thread is getting long, so I'll just advance the core arguments here for the time being:

• your solution is focused on technological decentralization, completely ignoring sociology and how users will ALWAYS trade decentralization for convenience. The moment something like that is deployed, there will be an adoption incentive for the majority of rns clients to adopt it. By extension, they will have to default the bootstrap nodes to something. Again, for 'convenience'. For reference bitcoin and the vast majority of torrent client embed the bootstraps in their actual source - fine for established network with millions of nodes and default drop bootstrap options, really NOT good for a tiny network already fighting the onslaught of slopware.

• there's no such thing as 'cute cottage economy nodes serving their local community'. It's been tried before what inevitably happens is the operators now take on a legal and financial burden in exchange of nothing, continue with that line of thought and you'll end up reinventing proof of work and block rewards, too. And we know what happened to both Namecoin and ENS. Eventually, everything coalesces into 'the one super convenient name node' with at best naive assurances that 'you can change it at anytime'

• I know your document makes the argument that nothing will be 'forced' on users. Do you know what else doesn't force anything on users? Mastodon. Do you know how many users bother changing away from Mastodon.social? My point exactly. Mastodon is as decentralized and as 'uncensored' as mastodon.social administrators want it to be, meaning it's neither. Sure, their influence over everyone else is "technically" indirect, yet it’s real and exercised by means of defaults. The people at the help understand correctly that a network and its protocol are simply what the majority code base deployed is. Again blockchain folks will be at home here, with forks being a closely related topic, and the reason why all nascent decentralized protocols tend to shit bricks when they hear the words 'this should be more popular, so we made some modifications...'

• Not necessary to my argument, but also inevitable: in addition to convenience you will inevitably hit the "but how do we stop the pedophiles/nazis/(insert horrible thing here)!!!!" from registering and/or resolving "illegal_evil_name.rns" argument. Because the very notion of preventing illegal things implies someone-who-is-not-the-end-user will have to make a decision, somewhere, sometime. To deal with type of thing at announce level, on rns THE END USER can blackhole it. The moment you put the 'blackhole' button in the hand of a third party that has a legal obligation as mentioned above, that party will instantly default to blackholing what is illegal in THEIR jurisdiction, not necessarily yours or mine. This is why blackhole_list is opt in only and should stay opt in only.

None of what I advanced here is novel or 'clever'. "Tyranny of the Default" has been known about for decades, I just happen to be old(er) and have lived to see countless "fully decentralized" systems becoming very much centralized indeed because of social issues. I may even have worked for a couple :)

But here's my real problem: as it is on rns, the power to run aliases (these already exists as someone else pointed out) is ALREADY the hands of END USERS already, so all of this it's a non issue - essentially is a user maintained host file of sorts.

Ok I typed too much.

Edit: words

My suggestion is this. A new rns utility rnalias and instance API to alias both identities and destinations to a human readable string which could then be cached+resolved by an RPC helper callback and used across different applications like NomadNet or MCX.

A destination alias would return the stored hash directly
An identity alias with a full name would derive the destination hash across different aspects
An identity alias without a full name would just return the identity hash

It would be just be local file next to config that's hand-editable with a small command line helper called rnalias or something

NONGKHAEM_BKK_TH wrote:

there's no such thing as 'cute cottage economy nodes serving their local community'. It's been tried before what inevitably happens is the operators now take on a legal and financial burden in exchange of nothing,

I mean that is what the entire public network consists of. I have no idea what you mean by this. No one is running a node for a financial incentive and it's not that financially or resource intensive to run a RNS node, especially if your ISP supports IPv6. And that's just for public Internet nodes. There are already a few LoRa networks in Italy, Russia, and the UK that cover certain metros, although not anywhere close to the saturation of MeshCore or MT.

What legal obligation? There is nothing any government from around the world could gather from a single Transport node besides traffic patterns, which they don't even need access to your node for.

And even if there was some massive legal risk, who do you think runs Tor exit nodes? (Unless you want to tell me thats all a guberment op). Non-profits, random volunteers, universities.

I would love some way to actually tie a nomad address to something more understandable for myself, so I support Zenith's idea.
.***********. NONGKHAEM_BKK_TH
I run 4 (as of tomorrow) public access nodes in Sofia, I pay expenses (internet at least for 3, all contracts in my name) and cost of parts procurement, building and installation on site, including the environment sensor realm. And I am not factoring in the VAST amount of time and effort on behalf of Nick for enabling all this. I will continue to do this and add nodes, until I get the static network to a usable coverage, and yes, it will be on me. The reward for me is the network itself, a living RN. I have no clue when and how many will join as users or operators, but this is not the point of it, is it? So yeah, what do you mean?
P.S. Oh thank you Zenith!!! :)

<snip> remind me to not attempt to edit messages on the go :)

I mean that is what the entire public network consists of. I have no idea what you mean by this.

I totallt didn’t express myself correctly on that specific point, but evidently I wasn’t referring to rns, as i myself am operating nodes. In fact just spent quite a bit of money on dedicated hardware to build a full blown rns local mesh in my village, and I’m planning to run a tvp backbone on multiple private vps.

My point was just that there is a genuine risk of recentralisation through the implementation of “convenience features” as part of well marketed clients and this has been demonstrated in the past in countless other “decentralised” networks.

I mean that is what the entire public network consists of.

Zenith do you honestly think there isn't even 1 NSA.node on RNS? There are at least 11 hyper aggressive scraper/archiver bots active on the network. The QUAD4 guy is also somehow associated with "some government/military entity". This is just a naive thing to say, sorry. Even if not true today, it will be true tomorrow. "Cottage industry" is not now nor has it ever been an effective theory of management of anything. Especially not global comms networks. Don't forget the power mod of r/worldnews was literally ghislaine maxwell LMFAO. Also mark already got "door knocked" a year ago. These are just general comments.

6b3fd579 wrote:

I mean that is what the entire public network consists of.

Zenith do you honestly think there isn't even 1 NSA.node on RNS? There are at least 11 hyper aggressive scraper/archiver bots active on the network. The QUAD4 guy is also somehow associated with "some government/military entity". This is just a naive thing to say, sorry. Even if not true today, it will be true tomorrow. "Cottage industry" is not now nor has it ever been an effective theory of management of anything. Especially not global comms networks. Don't forget the power mod of r/worldnews was literally ghislaine maxwell LMFAO. Also mark already got "door knocked" a year ago. These are just general comments.

Durr fucking hurrrrrr
You are arguing with an imaginary version of my post and shit you made up in your head. Never once did I claim anything of the sort.

Reticulum by default does not guarantee privacy and no one is claiming it does. Slapping a few TCP nodes in your config then accessing from your regular old ISP is not going to magically protect you from government surveillance.

The value an adversary would gain by running a public TCP transport is very little compared to tools they already have at their disposal. If you had any reading comprehension ability I included that in my fucking post.

Reticulum is not a privacy network. It can be used to great effect for enhancing privacy, but that depends on entirely how you use it. If government surveillance is in your threat model then you must do due dilligence as both the user and network operator to protect against such a threat. Reticulum provides you the tools for this. It does not magically do it for you. Nothing can, and any software or project claiming to is full of shit.

I see you people have moved off from the "HURR Mark is a dictator! Reticulum isn't open source! It's a MEAN and TAWXIC community" line and have moved to the nice new concern trolling "Reticulum is a fed honeypot!"

The QUAD4 guy is also somehow associated with "some government/military entity".

Are you ever going to provide proof of this? Or should I just take your word at face value like some sort of fucking moron that you think everyone is?

"Cottage industry" is not now nor has it ever been an effective theory of management of anything

So what do you propose then? Some people are interested in Reticulum purely as a hobby, and enjoy running services and utilities. Unless those are all secret government agents or whatever.

Don't forget the power mod of r/worldnews was literally ghislaine maxwell LMFAO

I don't even know what this means or what world news is.

Also mark already got "door knocked" a year ago

LOL, ok! It's honestly cute to watch you invent BS like this.

6b3fd579 wrote:

I mean that is what the entire public network consists of.

Zenith do you honestly think there isn't even 1 NSA.node on RNS? There are at least 11 hyper aggressive scraper/archiver bots active on the network. The QUAD4 guy is also somehow associated with "some government/military entity". This is just a naive thing to say, sorry. Even if not true today, it will be true tomorrow. "Cottage industry" is not now nor has it ever been an effective theory of management of anything. Especially not global comms networks. Don't forget the power mod of r/worldnews was literally ghislaine maxwell LMFAO. Also mark already got "door knocked" a year ago. These are just general comments.

Here's my vote for an inline purgatory that can collapse posts like this. The tactics of COINTELPRO are alive and well and carried on by random people who have deputized themselves in service of the state without even realizing it. This is like a random sampling of tactics from some shitty disinfo handbook. Grabbing a random term ("cottage industry") from a discussion and including it in a post to make it look like they are actually involved in the conversation, but without any real substance or relevance, is yet another behavior to watch out for that seems to crop up a lot here.

I agree with you, Zenith and K8. But, TBF:

Also mark already got "door knocked" a year ago

This actually did happen, a while ago

Anyways... back to the interesting discussion.

I think that trust is the underlying issue here more than name resolution. Reticulum guarantees that only someone with the associated private keys can control a destination hash. It also makes destination hashes primary and easy to work with, which avoids the many pitfalls of IP addresses and DNS. Announces can contain convenience information like a name, but Reticulum doesn't ensure that the destination hash you are communicating with actually belongs to the person you think it does. You need a way to exchange dest hashes out-of-band or have some other method of verifying who you are talking to. This is the same problem that public-key infrastructure faces in general, and which has been badly solved by centralized CA infrastructure.

If (and only if) you are relying solely on announced names for discovery to find peers to communicate with, a malicious Transport node could MITM all of your communications by intercepting announces in both directions and sending new announces with a duplicated convenience name, but with destination hashes it controls. Again, this is no different from other PKI systems. Reticulum gains some resilience against this by virtue of being a mesh, and the more widely connected you can be, the more likely you are to be able to spot an attack like this. Mo' mesh mo' better, basically. For the attack to work the malicious Transport node needs to be a choke point for any targeted users.

Before you can even consider some kind of name resolution system, you need a way to approach this trust problem. Framing it in this way also forces you to approach it from the bottom up, which is the only way it can work on a decentralized network. Existing approaches that I know of for doing this in a decentralized way are either PGP's web of trust or similar (bringing back key signing parties like it's the 1990s), or are based on blockchains, neither of which are really suitable for Reticulum. The web of trust concept is definitely a lot more relevant, though, and something like that seems like a possible starting point. At the very least some kind of user-friendly tools to manage which destinations you've verified and trust, cross signing, revocation for compromised keys, and all that sort of thing would go a long ways.

K8 wrote:

carried on by random people who have deputized themselves in service of the state without even realizing it

This is so well put, and so spot on. I find the way he reused my words in an attempt at creating strife where there was none particularly neurotic. To see someone stoop that low, on a community project, shows a level of obsession that has now devolved into the domain of the parasocial.

Anyways back to the convo, and totally agreed with your points!