Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Yggdrasil – Early-stage implementation of an end-to-end encrypted IPv6 network

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 109 posts

Re: Yggdrasil – Early-stage implementation of an end-to-end encrypted IPv6 network

#91

Post by dash2 »

ComodoHacker wrote: post #80
hutzlibu wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"For example, much of the popular conception of Ragnarok is heavily influenced by Christian eschatology, instead of the original Norse beliefs. " In more easy words: christians believe that one day the world really ends with judgment day/apocalypse, and interpreted Ragnarok similar as the end of the world, which is what many people today think of Ragnarok (and that view that gets reinforced by the popular movies) But…

To be fair, nothing in the New Testament explicitly denies the possibility of repeating the cycle. CMIIW.

Funnily enough, the early Church Father Origen believed that time was circular.

Re: Yggdrasil – Early-stage implementation of an end-to-end encrypted IPv6 network

#92

Post by jdsully »

nicce wrote: post #77

Can someone explain, why it has end-to-end encryption by default on this level, and why it is good? Isn't this project more about host discovery and routing. Is it providing more performance compared to encryption on other layers, or just for "easy automatic" data encryption? Based on documentation, it sounds that they have some kind of own crypto implementation in the end. I found the whitepaper describing used algo…

This allows us to focus our investment on one layer and have it apply to all applications on top "for free". I'm not saying this specific implementation is the right one, but having it below the app layer makes a ton of sense.

Re: Yggdrasil – Early-stage implementation of an end-to-end encrypted IPv6 network

#93

Post by aleken »

boardwaalk wrote: post #89
aleken wrote: post #88

I have two devices split by VNET and not routed out to the internet. I connect those two and a VPS to create a small Yggdrasil network. This allows me to access all three devices from “anywhere”. Would use again.

What does this give you that Wireguard wouldn’t? (Honest question, I have no idea.)

Oh. Also. If I lose my VPS my network is still functioning to a degree. If you lose your wireguard server I believe you’re out of luck?

Re: Yggdrasil – Early-stage implementation of an end-to-end encrypted IPv6 network

#94

Post by andrius4669 »

wiml wrote: post #72

How does this compare to cjdns? Has anyone tried both?

It works pretty similar to cjdns, but implementation is not as crashy in my experience, also some transport protocol differences (ygg uses tcp while cjdns does udp), also DHT routing instead of cjdns supernode stuff.

So while usability is pretty similar, they're pretty different underneath.

Re: Yggdrasil – Early-stage implementation of an end-to-end encrypted IPv6 network

#96

Post by rjmalagon »

infogulch wrote: post #83

How does Yggdrasil compare to Wireguard? A github search shows that yggrasil-go uses wireguard-tun project as the tun driver; does it relate in any other way? The main problem/use case is different of course (Wireguard is a manually configured point-to-point vpn with e2ee, where yggdrasil is an internet-scale overlay network with e2ee.), but I mean at a low level, protocol, encryption, etc.

At low level is not related to WireGuard in any way. The wintun project only exposes a virtual network interface to Windows systems, a clean and proper signed windows driver. That side project to Wireguard was created because the native windows virtual interface is too basic for "advanced vpns" and the former windows TUN driver (OpenVPN side project TUN driver for windows) used by everyone was clunky and old.

YG uses it own crypto and routing, wintun is used here only to expose the virtual network interface on Windows.

Re: Yggdrasil – Early-stage implementation of an end-to-end encrypted IPv6 network

#97

Post by rjmalagon »

natural219 wrote: post #85
infogulch wrote: post #83

How does Yggdrasil compare to Wireguard? A github search shows that yggrasil-go uses wireguard-tun project as the tun driver; does it relate in any other way? The main problem/use case is different of course (Wireguard is a manually configured point-to-point vpn with e2ee, where yggdrasil is an internet-scale overlay network with e2ee.), but I mean at a low level, protocol, encryption, etc.

I’d also be curious about this. Say for the use case of running a small private chat server hosted on a home network; does either of these seem better suited, or are they just different architectures that can handle mostly similar things?

Very different. WireGuard is explicit basic, only cares how to make an encrypted link between two devices, and do it very well. Key exchange, IP assignation and routing are manual work. There are solution build on top of WireGuard (Tailscale is one of them) that puts some "automagic".

YG puts more "magic" on protocol (autorouting, mesh making, etc), but is not that clean on design (crypto not formally tested, latency prone TCP links, not good enough NAT punching, etc).

Wireguard and YG are different tools on the SDN network toolbox, and can be mixed for special porpoises.

Re: Yggdrasil – Early-stage implementation of an end-to-end encrypted IPv6 network

#98

Post by rjmalagon »

commandlinefan wrote: post #57

The documentation is a little light - is this similar to Freenet?

Nope, is more like a "Vitual public network" maker. Peer links are encrypted, each peer has its own key, but DHT and routing is not obfuscated. It exposes virtual network interfaces with an IPV6 address per node. You can use common software on it.

"Magic VPN" or "Magic E2EE LAN" kinda IPSEC for commoners, depends on how you config it.

Re: Yggdrasil – Early-stage implementation of an end-to-end encrypted IPv6 network

#99

Post by jancsika »

nickik wrote: post #65
ment0s wrote: post #48

What a stupid name. Looks like misspelled medicine name.

Its a great name. Its your general knowledge that is the problem.

I don't see anything in the rules against bringing a comment back from the dead.

I'm gonna bring it back from the dead.

Summons

"What a stupid name. Looks like misspelled medicine name."

Also of note-- the same user posted almost the same comment twice-- once without the final word "name" in it.

I prefer the version with the trailing "name" because it flows better.

Thank you.

Re: Yggdrasil – Early-stage implementation of an end-to-end encrypted IPv6 network

#100

Post by edoceo »

dash2 wrote: post #91
ComodoHacker wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair, nothing in the New Testament explicitly denies the possibility of repeating the cycle. CMIIW.

Funnily enough, the early Church Father Origen believed that time was circular.

So does Futurama.
Post reply on HN