Veilid supports UDP and doesn't have exit nodes, which makes it very much like I2P.

From https://mastodon.top/@lispi314/110873982436970994

"From a first look, it doesn't seem to provide any particular security/anonymity guarantees that #I2P doesn't.

It does however greatly facilitate ensuring leaks based on services hosted behind the same router can't happen, by essentially giving every application its own router.

Its main gains appear to be facilitation and convenience in modern networks."

There are also a lot of concerns about leaking info, which is to be expected. LizPi goes on to say https://mastodon.top/@lispi314/110874001616121495

"The #mixnet use is unclear and the lack of #Loopix-style loop messages seems like a potential problem for cover traffic.

Cover traffic is entirely unmentioned during the entirety of the slides.

It would be possible to build that atop of #Veilid of course.

There are no mentions of delays in messages nor any other manipulation to mitigate timing analysis.

If nodes select routes based on performance, that's an additional deanonymization risk (shared by #I2P)."

The bottom line is that it's new, and the people promoting it are very loud and good at getting media attention. The people I've seen post about it who did not develop it but looked at the code haven't had much good to say about it.

I haven't looked at it myself because I've been too busy with other projects. Namely fighting with SeedSigner's build environment to build an air gapped authentication system.