Provide a simple way for potential physical nodes to mark themself on the map

[thefinn93]

Cannot require things like a cjdns IP, must be very clear that it is for potential nodes, and the display mechanism for showing these must be clearly different from the one showing Internet/UDP peers (currently called VPSs I believe)

[alexander-bauer]

The main technical limitation on this is how we store active
nodes. The IP address is the primary key. The most obvious way to
overcome this is to add another table for potential nodes, for which
the IDs are long random integers. This would be theoretically simple,
but would involve a certain amount of updating to existing code, like

DumpNodes() and similar.

Uncrimethink
0x76AAD89B

[danry25]

So what your saying is that this nodeshot replacement isn't going to be able to replicate basic nodeshot functionality any time soon?

[alexander-bauer]

No, I'm explaining the technical reason that it doesn't. It's a
simple problem, and one that might not be obvious to anyone interested
in implementing this besides the very few who know the codebase very
well.

I've outlined the problem and the solution. It's theoretically
trivial. If you want it to happen faster, don't complain. Implement
it.

Uncrimethink
0x76AAD89B

[danry25]

It seems to me that basing the database around a users supposen IPv6 address is asking for trouble, and really limits NodeAtlas to specifically CJDNS/IPv6 nodes that already exist. Is there some major reason why NodeAtlas didn't start with internal unique user ids for each node right off the bat?

Also, I'd love to go fork myself & fix this, but sadly there aren't enough hours in the day for me to do that currently. It just seems to me that this project has had a bad case of mission creep going on, as it originally started out as a generic replacement for Nodeshot, then it was supposed to be usable for any mapping application, and now here we are with something that does neither.

[danry25]

Just as a follow up, it appears adding fun features like RSS is a higher priority than straightening out basic features like this based on the recent commit history?

[dansup]

@danry25 @thefinn93 Perhaps you could contribute code instead of demands.

[danry25]

@dansup this is basic functionality we're asking for here, not some one off feature that will be rarely used.

[thefinn93]

@dansup These are fundamental changes to the structure of the whole thing, and neither of us speak go. You know this, stop trying to provoke us.

[lukevers]

I should mention two things:

First, this is in the works (like a real way).
Second, you can register as a node and then edit your node saying that you're not an active node.