Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This came up on the forum and someone raised a good point - would direct connections require the sender and receiver to be online at the same time? I feel like the architecture has to be more clever than just a WebRTC connection between clients.



> would direct connections require the sender and receiver to be online at the same time?

Could always use 'indirect' connections to store-and-forward, and only relying on the central server when absolutely necessary.

You do risk some lost messages when you underestimate failures, but the same thing applies to any central store-and-forward facility.

Early Kazaa depended on some nodes becoming supernodes. Supposedly initial Skype was decentralized like this (particular to get around NATs), until it became exclusively client-server.


There was a really good YouTube lecture about how signal works, and it addresses phones being offline.

Unfortunately there's been a ton of low-quality videos on Signal released in the past few days, and it's taking me a while to find it.


Might be the one from computerphile


The Signal protocol can deal with offline messaging, but it requires a server to do it. That is because of how the forward secrecy works. Presumably the amount of traffic would be fairly negligible for what would just be keying information.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: