The Encoding for Robust Immutable Storage (ERIS) is a specification of
a networked-optimized form of content-addressing.
ERIS allows arbitary content to be made more robustly available. It can
be used to share large media files, archives of software or small pieces
of data such as ActivityStream objects. It is specifically designed for
small collectives and organizations to make their content robustly
available.
Content is split into a set of uniformly sized, encrypted and
content-addressable blocks which can be decoded from the blocks with a
short identifier called the read capability. The read capability can be
encoded as an URN for easy and interoperable sharing of content.
Blocks can be transported over many different transport
protocols. Examples include HTTP, GNUnet, CoAP, IPFS, or a bicylce. The
security requirements for transport protocols are low and intermediary
peers can assist in making content available while themeselves not being
able to decode the content.
In a prospective session we would like to present and discuss a brief
overview of ERIS, the possible applications and ongoing work. We look
forward to meeting and hearing from people and groups working towards
collective data sovereignty and interoperability beyond protocols.
I have a suggesting here. ERIS is one of the reasons we went for Vessel instead, which I proposed at IETF115. The draft is still undergoing revisions, but is “ready enough”.
I can repeat that presentation easily enough; it’s pretty short. The two presentations could be used to set the context for a round table or some such, which seems to be more OFFDEM’s format?
I welcome your suggestion. But would like to highlight that ERIS and
Vessel seem to have quite different use-cases and design goals (based on
the Vessel spec and from our previous exchanges). I think it would be a
great opportunity to understand the differences and for which use-case
what is suitable. We should be wary to not cause confusion as the two
might seem similar on initial glance (btw: ERIS spec is licensed as
CC-BY-SA-4.0).
For example, some points where ERIS and Vessel differ:
ERIS is designed for Censorship Resistance - to make content as
robustly available as possible. ERIS is not suitable for private
communication. It does not provide Confidentiality, Authenticity or
Privacy. Vessel on the other hand is designed to provide Authenticity,
Confidentiality and Privacy, whereas Censorship Resistance is not a
primary goal (Section 4.1.1 of the Vessel draft).
From what I understand Vessel has P2P video streaming in mind, it is
designed for high-bandwidth/low-latency situations. ERIS is designed
for the opposite, low-bandwith/high-latency.
Jens Finkhaeuser via petites singularités ps@zoethical.com writes:
That’s sort of my point, to present these kinds of differences to the room by discussing them. That’s also why I will hold off on discussing your comments here, which are fairly accurate, for what it’s worth. I’d just nitpick a little, but we can save that for OFFDEM
Excellent! Covering the specter of different design decisions helps understand the complexity and granularity of technical development. I would be happy to see something from both of you coming up along those lines. <3
I’ll re-use slides I have, which means I’d need about 15 minutes for it, give or take. I would suggest to go after the ERIS talk, because I’ve mentioned ERIS as one of the inspirations.
Furthermore, maybe 15 mins of ERIS and 15 mins of Vessel is also enough talking at the audience, I guess? Then open up the floor for common Q&A so we can use that as triggers for discussing differences in use cases and pros and cons?
I would in all cases bring up again @jfinkhaeuser original questions as a structure for the conversation:
I mean starting the conversation from maybe not only technical but also organisational point of view:
Concerns such as
How did you decide such projects (Eris and Vessel) were needed; looking at previous free software past what are the needs that brought such technical developments .
In what line of thought do those projects take place, what exactly do they bring in terms of technical organisation.
How do the choice of these structures propose different models that might impact social organisation.
What if Eris and/or Vessel would be effectively implemented at a large scale, what would it entail as a perspective.
I mean its important to have an in depth technical discussion, but framing technical issues within social concerns might broaden the exchange and make those issues more understandable while challenging a bit developers …:’
Jens Finkhaeuser via petites singularités ps@zoethical.com writes:
I’ll re-use slides I have, which means I’d need about 15 minutes for it, give or take. I would suggest to go after the ERIS talk, because
I’ve mentioned ERIS as one of the inspirations.
Furthermore, maybe 15 mins of ERIS and 15 mins of Vessel is also enough talking at the audience, I guess? Then open up the floor for
common Q&A so we can use that as triggers for discussing differences in use cases and pros and cons?
WDYT?
Sounds good to me.
Will there be a beamer or screen for slides be available?
I mean starting the conversation from maybe not only technical but also organisational point of
view:
Concerns such as
How did you decide such projects (Eris and Vessel) were needed; looking at previous free software
past what are the needs that brought such technical developments .
In what line of thought do those projects take place, what exactly do they bring in terms of
technical organisation.
How do the choice of these structures propose different models that might impact social
organisation.
What if Eris and/or Vessel would be effectively implemented at a large scale, what would it entail
as a perspective.
I mean its important to have an in depth technical discussion, but framing technical issues within
social concerns might broaden the exchange and make those issues more understandable while
challenging a bit developers …:’
Absolutely, I think these are excellent starting points. Thank you @natacha.
