On 2/29/16, Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com> wrote:
Replace "sufficiently decent" by "perfect", or define it to be "provably intractable" and do not assume hardness not proved unconditionally, like P != NP.
So long as each node accounts for negotiated contract rate with peers, and generate fill for missing packets on the inbound links when output the other side, and reclock all the input when output to a fixed rate, and add random jitter to the output links to mask time spend negotiating and compensating for the input junk received... it would seem range from reasonable sufficient to damn hard. It's an enhanced level of the fixed bucket clocks in old school ATM / TDM that people seem to forgot about... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asynchronous_Transfer_Mode#Traffic_policing https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Time-division_multiplexing There was even talk on one of these lists about doing fill not just in the overlay networks, but also doing it, along with automatic pfs style encryption in the layer zero link hardware itself (ethernet PHY, etc) by starting an IEEE / IETF working group... every switch, router and NIC port everywhere. Some OP threads for ref: https://cpunks.org/pipermail/cypherpunks/2016-February/012436.html metzdowd: "traffic analysis" Jan 2015 My spam on @cpunks @torproject Etc et al Encrypted fill traffic is at least worth thinking about, thus cc.