Replying to Avatar someone

Mazin from nostr.wine wrote this convincing article where he says having gazillions of connections is not a good idea.

https://habla.news/u/mazinkhoury.com/1710959004510

I agree. This huge # of connection requirements won't work. Especially on mobile. If we were RSS syncs, it could. But we are more like twitter. People want real time interaction imo.

A way to decentralize relays could be:

Let there be 8 big relays.

relay 0 only accepts event id's ending with 000

relay 1 ending with 001

...

relay 7 ending with 111.

Kind of like RAIDs. If you want more reliability do 16 and there will be 2 copies of each.

All relay ops should go along with this vision of course... Politics needed.

It will also reduce the amount of duplication of events (less mobile traffic) for clients.

It will also reduce the amount of data each relay has to hold and forward..

Each big relay will be responsible for 1/8th of what is happening on Nostr (I mean I don't want to be responsible for all the illegal stuff on Nostr, lol)

The institutions that want the stuff banned on Nostr will see at least 8 different operators when they want to contact Nostr. I know some institutions already contacted client devs for stuff like copyright issues..

But some relays are paid. It will be hard to incorporate paid relays into this equation: "Hey I paid for this relay, why can't I write to it? What do you mean sharding?"

What will happen to the 9th biggest and so on? Well every operator chooses a shard from the list 0 - 7. Whatever the relay chooses it advertises on NIP-11.

When a relay doesnt behave, we all booo it.

If things go wrong, instead of 3 now you have 8 people to deal with, lol.

Thoughts?

nostr:npub18kzz4lkdtc5n729kvfunxuz287uvu9f64ywhjz43ra482t2y5sks0mx5sz nostr:npub180cvv07tjdrrgpa0j7j7tmnyl2yr6yr7l8j4s3evf6u64th6gkwsyjh6w6

oof... totally not the right way to do it

needs to be much more open than that

we have NIP-65 so that users can pick where they want to use (including, where supported, AUTH restricted access paid relays - if the damn clients would damn well implement it, damnit!) and they advertise those around, and the various gossiping, syncing relays that want to catch everything specifically should ensure they catch these ones, above all else

as for expanding the storage capability in a collective sort of way, you could have federations of relays that link up to a common large storage back end, or several

there is already massive ad-hoc replication of data on the network, and i see no problem with this but for larger blobs of the system like these shared back end stores (i'm working on a project involving one) definitely there is no practical way to make a One Ring of Relays To Rule Them All you are totally missing the point of what makes nostr good, it's that permissionless, ad hoc, disorganised structure, it's not a bug, it's a feature

i mean, yes, you could have this sort of solution at some level but pushing it out into the main protocol would be completely impractical and nobody would ever agree with shrinking our censorship resistance and permeability this much

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

No replies yet.