From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <3e6d4eab4549250f8552796cec33cf81@proxima.alt.za>
To: 9fans@9fans.net
Date: Tue,  3 Feb 2009 06:23:51 +0200
From: lucio@proxima.alt.za
In-Reply-To: <1233614010.4412.412.camel@goose.sun.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [9fans] Sources Gone?
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 92fdd652-ead4-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

> The one and only fundamental limitation of the current interface
> offered by venti is that I can give it a score to something that
> doesn't belong to me and it gives me the information back. It is
> the limitation of the API, not the way data is managed.

I'm not sure how you'd fix this.  What if only a portion of the block
belongs to me and the other happens to be the password file?  You need
to draw boundaries at different security entities and that makes
compression and especially duplicate suppression much less effective.

You could argue that the security information provides its own
boundaries, but making venti aware of them does add a lot of
complications that in my opinion should be (and already are) solved
elsewhere.  I did propose that compression and encryption ought to be
concurrent in venti, but that solves only part of the problem and
raises new problems such as key management.

++L

PS: As for the problem we're trying to solve, I'm afraid I've long ago
lost track :-)