| ---------------------------------------- | |
| Federation and gopher | |
| June 27th, 2018 | |
| ---------------------------------------- | |
| Some of you guys were talking about a "federated gopher" on | |
| Mastodon the other day. At first I was all into the idea and | |
| getting ready to chime in with support. But then I started | |
| thinking about what that would mean and I hit a wall. I think my | |
| understanding of federation in recent context has skewed away from | |
| the community idea. With all the work on ActivityPub and the new | |
| clients popping up in the Fediverse I feel like I should probably | |
| spend the time to figure out what it is everyone is talking about | |
| when they use the word Federated. | |
| Since we're talking definitions here, I figured I should start by | |
| telneting to my happy dictionary [0] that I described in an old | |
| phlog post [1]. Then I ran my query: "define english federation". | |
| Here's what popped out: | |
| <security> The establishment of some or all of business | |
| agreements, {cryptographic} trust and user identifiers or | |
| attributes across security and policy domains to enable more | |
| seamless business interaction. | |
| As {web services} promise to enable integration between | |
| business partners through {loose coupling} at the application | |
| and messaging layer, federation does so at the identity | |
| management layer, insulating each domain from the details of | |
| the others' authentication and authorization. Key to this | |
| loose coupling at the identity management layer are | |
| standardized mechanisms and formats for the communication of | |
| identity information between the domains. {SAML} is one such | |
| standard. | |
| From the sound of that definition, gopher is already federated in | |
| that identity information between domains is inherent to the | |
| protocol because it's irrelevant. There's no authorized use | |
| mechanism here and the act of hosting content on a server is | |
| enough to identify the source. Since I host on gopher.black, if | |
| your use of gopher queries my server you have used standard | |
| mechanisms and formats for the communication of that information | |
| between the domains, right? | |
| Maybe the reason I'm having such difficulty is because my only | |
| exposure to federation as an idea has been via things like | |
| Mastodon which have far more interoperable parts. Content from one | |
| independent system is consumed and becomes content within another | |
| one, and the source of that content, the author, server, etc, all | |
| need to be accounted for in the communication. That requires more | |
| than gopher for sure. | |
| Even so, I'm not satisfied. I think there's more to federation | |
| than that definition. The context in how people discuss it seems | |
| to imply something else, but I can't put my finger on exactly what | |
| that might be. Distributed systems like IPFS come up a lot in | |
| those discussions, but I don't see a black & white relationship. | |
| I guess my slow brainmeats can't get past the idea that federation | |
| means I control my shiz but it can interact with everyone elses | |
| shiz in the same way. Am I so far off? Let me know with a reply or | |
| email or mastodon or a hand written letter. | |
| Yes! Hand written letters are my absolute favorite. They | |
| demonstrate all that extra effort, they're physical treasures, and | |
| I get to silently judge your personality through bullshit | |
| handwriting interpretation that I make up on the spot. Everyone | |
| wins! Send me an note with a reference to a pgp key and I'll send | |
| you back my mailing address on the down-low. | |
| Cheers, fedi-gophers | |
| [0] Telnet to dict.org | |
| [1] CLI Tricks: Dictionaries |