Other remotes providers - Githubissues

m-ld / m-ld-spec

Platform-independent m-ld specification

https://spec.m-ld.org/

MIT License

24 stars 1 forks source link

Other remotes providers #90

Closed gsvarovsky closed 2 years ago

gsvarovsky commented 3 years ago

what

Support for additional remotes providers. Comments below with alternative providers.

why

Fully a peer-to-peer remotes would demonstrate how m-ld can be used in a fully-decentralised deployment.

janthecollaborator commented 2 years ago

Bridgefy

https://bridgefy.me/sdk/

See https://github.com/m-ld/m-ld-spec/discussions/81

Doesn't even use the internet.
❌ Currently free but will become paid "sometime during 2021".

Potentially some brainstorming around the fact that connectivity between clones will be much more variable, you perhaps don't want Bridgefy to be hopping the message from clone A's messaging layer to clone C's via clone B's, rather, expose to m-ld the lack of connectivity between A and C.

gsvarovsky commented 2 years ago

libp2p

https://libp2p.io/

Status 2022: https://fosdem.org/2022/schedule/event/libp2p/

This is an intermediary library that could allow a freer use of underlying transports.

gsvarovsky commented 2 years ago

XMPP

XMPP is a open, free and decentralized instant messaging network.

https://xmpp.org

Decentralised server-based message protocol
✅ Browser library support e.g. JSXC

Used by openEngiadina (in preference to ActivityPub and Matrix)

Hosting: https://wiki.xmpp.org/web/XMPP_Hosting_Providers

In particular: https://snikket.org/hosting/

gsvarovsky commented 2 years ago

ØMQ

https://zeromq.org

✅ No hosting: decentralised.
❌ Websocket transport exists (JSMQ) but may not be maintained and requires a live server.

gsvarovsky commented 2 years ago

Neuropil

https://www.neuropil.org

(NGI Zero funded)

✅ No hosting: decentralised
❌ No websocket transport option = no browsers

gsvarovsky commented 2 years ago

Briar

https://briarproject.org/

✅ No hosting: decentralised.
❌ No websocket transport option or other browser implementation.

gsvarovsky commented 2 years ago

WAMP

https://wamp-proto.org/

Publish & Subscribe
Routed Remote Procedure Calls

Driven and implemented by https://crossbar.io/ (router) Native support for Tor

✅ Websocket-based, so browser-native clients available
❌ Websocket-based, so routers required – and clustering is paid

gsvarovsky commented 2 years ago

p2panda

https://p2panda.org/handbook/

a user-friendly peer-to-peer communications protocol

Based on an append-only log

✅ "Browser friendliness"
❌ Discovery & Replication "not implemented"

May be primarily useful for better journaling and transport security

gsvarovsky commented 2 years ago

WebRTC mesh/gossip

Many papers and packages available (Google search, comment in simple-peer library), but probably best to roll our own version that suits us.

✅ Browser-native (fast)
❌ Still requires some server support: discovery, signalling, STUN, TURN
❌ Mesh approach will not scale to lots of peers
❌ Enterprise networks may not allow it