3 ms·

Sounds a little like IPFS: a global file system based on end-to-end cryptographically verified files distributed through untrusted nodes. Anyone want to compa

by comex 10y ago

Sounds a little like IPFS: a global file system based on end-to-end cryptographically verified files distributed through untrusted nodes. Anyone want to compare the two?

franciscop 10y ago
This seems to focus on the human part (you can just type it) while the tech is underneath and IPFS seems to focus on the machine availability while the devs would have to create a front-end for humans when needed; I think that it would be better compared to IPNS
kodablah 10y ago
From my early reading, this isn't quite as distributed as it relies on a directory server and email for identification.
david-given 10y ago
As far as I can make out, this isn't distributed --- while there may be multiple file servers, each piece of data is stored on exactly one file server, and you need to use the directory service to allow you to identify which file server stores the data. Then you contact that file server and it's a perfectly ordinary remote file system. It sounds like it ought to be nigh-trivial to bolt IPFS support onto it, so that the file server is replaced by IPNS (can't be IPFS because Upspin is mutable). So, you look up elvis@theking.com/fnord and the directory server hands you '<hash>/fnord', and the client library then goes and looks up the data via IPNS. No file servers required. Of course, this means that the only way of doing ACL enforcement is via encrypted data which is unlocked via ephemeral keys handed out by the keyserver, which as a solution is pretty terrible, but ACL enforcement in a decentralised system is practically impossible anyway.
niftich 10y ago
After a quick read, to me the difference vs. something like IPFS+IPNS seems to be the quasi-"federation" angle, such that Upspin acts like a protocol you can retrofit into an existing content store instead of self-hosted software with its own "captive" private datastore. For these reasons, I find it conceptually most akin to BitTorrent when combined with Magnet Links that are shared by strongly-authenticated identities than to any other distributed content store project.

by comex 10y ago

Sounds a little like IPFS: a global file system based on end-to-end cryptographically verified files distributed through untrusted nodes. Anyone want to compare the two?

franciscop 10y ago

This seems to focus on the human part (you can just type it) while the tech is underneath and IPFS seems to focus on the machine availability while the devs would have to create a front-end for humans when needed; I think that it would be better compared to IPNS

kodablah 10y ago

From my early reading, this isn't quite as distributed as it relies on a directory server and email for identification.

david-given 10y ago

As far as I can make out, this isn't distributed --- while there may be multiple file servers, each piece of data is stored on exactly one file server, and you need to use the directory service to allow you to identify which file server stores the data. Then you contact that file server and it's a perfectly ordinary remote file system. It sounds like it ought to be nigh-trivial to bolt IPFS support onto it, so that the file server is replaced by IPNS (can't be IPFS because Upspin is mutable). So, you look up elvis@theking.com/fnord and the directory server hands you '<hash>/fnord', and the client library then goes and looks up the data via IPNS. No file servers required. Of course, this means that the only way of doing ACL enforcement is via encrypted data which is unlocked via ephemeral keys handed out by the keyserver, which as a solution is pretty terrible, but ACL enforcement in a decentralised system is practically impossible anyway.

niftich 10y ago

After a quick read, to me the difference vs. something like IPFS+IPNS seems to be the quasi-"federation" angle, such that Upspin acts like a protocol you can retrofit into an existing content store instead of self-hosted software with its own "captive" private datastore. For these reasons, I find it conceptually most akin to BitTorrent when combined with Magnet Links that are shared by strongly-authenticated identities than to any other distributed content store project.