[p2p-hackers] Kad Network with Kademlia

[Daniel Stutzbach]

On Sat, Dec 17, 2005 at 06:43:30PM -0500, Eunsoo Shim wrote:
> >I mean those that can receive unsolicited TCP and UDP packets on the
> >Kad/eMule ports.  Either they must not be firewalled/NATed or the user
> >must manually punch a whole to redirect those ports from the firewall
> >device.
> >
> So port 80 or 443 is NOT used at all for Kad Network?

Not normally, no.  eMule lets the user configure their peer to use
ports other than the default, so they could use any port they want in
that case.  But the vast majority of peers do not use port 80 or 443
at all.

> "Iterative" DHT routing is inefficient compared to "recursive" one.
> Is "iterative" routing used because of a concern about DoS attacks?

Kademlia is an inherently iterative DHT.  I suspect the Kad developers
used iterative routing simply because they chose Kademlia as a
starting point.  I'm not one of the Kad developers though, so I can
only guess at the reasons behind their design decisions.

I'd observe, though, that iterative routing is much easier to debug.

-- 
Daniel Stutzbach                           Computer Science Ph.D Student
http://www.barsoom.org/~agthorr                     University of Oregon