(no title)
ixfo | 3 years ago
Whereas in a blockchain, if you assume the participants are the same set of actors - which would make sense - then it would be very easy for a majority of network control to be held by a Google, an AT&T, a China Telecom, etc.
Introducing third-parties who are not neccesarily involved in the operation of networks to said blockchain also opens up BGP operators to a whole new raft of attacks. Want to blackhole an ASN? If you can convince a smart contract that the routing policy for that ASN is "drop all traffic" then you don't even need to compromise people's routers or muck around with all that messy DDoS stuff.
Bad, bad idea. Just like 99% of stuff with the word "blockchain" in it.
everfree|3 years ago
Why wouldn't one just design such a system to give each entity equal sway over the network? One entity, one vote.
jimmydorry|3 years ago
I think you would need something like a web of trust (each entity is responsible for the actors they vouch for). Otherwise, some kind of proof of how many users they represent.
dgellow|3 years ago
rvz|3 years ago
[0] https://skiff.org
[1] https://ens.domains
[2] https://impervious.com/beacon