Return-Path: william@bourbon.usc.edu
Delivery-Date: Tue Nov 25 20:50:56 2008
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on merlot.usc.edu
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.4 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	version=3.2.3
Received: from bourbon.usc.edu (bourbon.usc.edu [128.125.9.75])
	by merlot.usc.edu (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id mAQ4ousX019633
	for <cs551@merlot.usc.edu>; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 20:50:56 -0800
Received: from bourbon.usc.edu (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
	by bourbon.usc.edu (8.14.2/8.14.1) with ESMTP id mAQ4nisp016531
	for <cs551@merlot>; Tue, 25 Nov 2008 20:49:44 -0800
Message-Id: <200811260449.mAQ4nisp016531@bourbon.usc.edu>
To: cs551@merlot.usc.edu
Subject: Re: Get Flood
Date: Tue, 25 Nov 2008 20:49:44 -0800
From: Bill Cheng <william@bourbon.usc.edu>

Someone wrote:

  > In the specs, you have mentioned
  > 
  > "Before you flood a GET message, you should use the FileID to determine if
  > the current node has the file.* If it does, you should not flood a GET
  > message*. In this case, if the existing file is in the cache space, its
  > status should be changed so that it is *"moved"* to the permanent space (you
  > should also do whatever adjustments that are necessary). "
  > 
  > Isn't this a contradiction to what you mentioned ?

Hmm... I don't see any contradiction.  Could you elaborate?
--
Bill Cheng // bill.cheng@usc.edu <URL:http://merlot.usc.edu/william/usc/>




  On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 11:49 AM, Bill Cheng <william@bourbon.usc.edu>wrote:
  > Someone wrote:
  >
  >  > Can you explain what does plausible deniability mean?
  >
  > One important feature of the SERVANT network is that it
  > provides anonymity.  It's not just about you cannot know
  > who initiate a STORE or who initiated a GET.  You have
  > anonymity for all messages (except the ones that where
  > put in to allow grading).
  >
  > All messages are either flooded or forwarded.  So, a node
  > can deny that it's the recipient of a message and claim
  > that it's only forwarding a message.  Similarly, a node
  > can deny that it's the origin of a message and claim that
  > it's only forwarding a message.  This way, unless the
  > authority can record most of the traffic in the SERVANT
  > network, it would be difficult for the authority to figure
  > out exactly who initiated a message and who was the intended
  > recipient of the message.
  > --
  > Bill Cheng // bill.cheng@usc.edu <URL:http://merlot.usc.edu/william/usc/>
  >
  >
  >
  >
  >   On Sat, Nov 22, 2008 at 8:27 AM, Bill Cheng <william@bourbon.usc.edu>
  > wrote:
  >  > Someone wrote:
  >  >
  >  >  > When get message is flooded, suppose a node gets the message and
  >  >  > identifies the fileid and sha1 as being the ones that belong to a
  > file
  >  >  > it has, then should it send the get response and not flood the
  > request
  >  >  > or should it still flood the request message.
  >  >
  >  > It should continue to flood the GET request for the reason
  >  > of plausible deniability.
  >  > --
  >  > Bill Cheng // bill.cheng@usc.edu <URL:
  > http://merlot.usc.edu/william/usc/>