network.md

how neurons find each other, propagate cyberlinks, and maintain a shared view of the cybergraph. the network is lean: you pay for what you consume, epidemic broadcast is reserved for headers only, and most cyberlinks never touch most nodes.

This page specifies a proposed coordination profile. Header sizes, timing, market formulas, recursive proof sizes and routing examples are design targets; each deployed profile must declare its actual codec and verification rules. radio endpoint keys identify transport peers. Neuron authentication, network admission and remote consensus evidence have separate contracts.

A named robot attaches neurons. A neuron may publish through several devices and compatible networks; progs execute work under its captured authority. A node serves graph state for many subjects, a shard partitions that state and a network reference names a destination. The domain model keeps these identities separate. Changing peer connections or graph partitioning cannot change a pending operation's author or destination.

the principle: narrowcast everything, broadcast nothing

a cyberlink about Balinese rice terraces does not concern a node aggregating DeFi price feeds in Frankfurt. epidemic broadcast — sending every link to every node — treats the network as a stadium PA system. the cybergraph is a conversation, not an announcement.

the only artifact that every node needs is the block header (~232 bytes). headers commit to the full BBG root, enabling any claim to be verified. everything else is narrowcast: sent only to those who will aggregate it, subscribe to it, or pay for it.

what propagates how:

  headers (~232 bytes)     epidemic      every node
  cyberlinks               narrowcast    aggregators + namespace subscribers
  block data (DA blobs)    sampling      DAS verifiers (random sparse checks)
  query responses          point-to-point   the requester only

stack

┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│  cyber/network                      │  narrowcast routing, paid headers,
│  (this page)                        │  cybergraph-native coordination
├─────────────────────────────────────┤
│  cyber/communication                │  onion routing, proof of delivery,
│                                     │  CSIDH key agreement
├─────────────────────────────────────┤
│  radio                              │  QUIC, hole-punching, relay,
│  (iroh fork with Hemera)            │  verified streaming, blob transfer
├─────────────────────────────────────┤
│  UDP/IP                             │  physical transport
└─────────────────────────────────────┘

radio handles transport: QUIC connections, NAT hole-punching via radio/relay, verified streaming via radio/bao (Hemera Merkle trees). cyber/communication handles privacy: onion routing, CSIDH key agreement, zheng proof of delivery. this page handles coordination: who connects to whom, how data flows, and who pays for what.

peer discovery via cybergraph

The graph carries typed routes for endpoints, shards, services, networks and token books. An authorized record binds the name to its role, network, endpoint or committed state root, and provenance. Resolution discovers a route; a consumer separately checks who may publish it, its freshness and the proof required for the requested action. A book or shard name has no implicit neuron key. See 3c for the application contract.

traditional p2p networks use external mechanisms for peer discovery: DHTs (Kademlia), DNS seeds, hardcoded bootstrap nodes. cyber uses the cybergraph itself.

A neuron advertising an endpoint can publish its binding as a cyberlink:

~neuron/endpoint → particle(network, endpoint_id, relay_url, direct: [socket_addrs], revision)

This is a proposed name record shape: the ~ prefix denotes deterministic resolution. A subject may advertise several endpoints with separate network, device and expiry policies. Watch-only attachments need no endpoint or running process. Resolution verifies the publishing subject under the named identity domain; possessing a transport endpoint key alone supplies no action grant.

three discovery mechanisms work together (inherited from radio/discovery):

Pkarr supplies bootstrap routes. The graph directory adds authenticated endpoint bindings and the profile's stake/ranking policy. Discovery requires a verified subject-to-endpoint binding before attributing actions to that subject. A signature, accepted revision and expiry determine binding validity; ranking and forgetting determine discoverability. Revocation remains enforceable even while an older claim retains graph history or rank.

paid headers: the lean protocol

this market is the economic half of the oikos freshness contract: a condition that demands "tier ≥ τ, no older than t" is a standing bid for fresh counterparty headers, and the header market clears it. staleness is not an error state — it is a price

the block header is the trust anchor — it commits to the full BBG root and lets any light client verify any claim about the cybergraph. distributing headers for free means light clients extract full verification value at zero cost. cyber does not do this.

headers are a pull resource. the receiver extracts value (verification capability), so the receiver pays.

bootstrap economics

a new neuron entering the network must acquire some $CYB before downloading even the first header. this is skin in the game from the first byte. acquisition paths:

• receive from another neuron (gift, payment, grant)
• earn through relay services (tit-for-tat reciprocity does not require tokens)
• acquire on an external market through its explicit network adapter, or use a home-book trade when the oikos settlement profile is available

once the neuron holds tokens, it buys headers from peers. neighbors can offer headers cheaper — lower relay cost due to proximity, reciprocity credits from prior interactions. this creates geographic price differentiation naturally, without protocol-level sharding.

header pricing

header price = base_fee(relay) × header_size × route_cost(peer)

• base_fee(relay) is the EIP-1559 exponential fee for the relay primitive (see cyber/architecture)
• header_size is ~232 bytes (constant)
• route_cost(peer) is the quoted transport/availability cost; the market must define its units and constraints. A latency estimate alone does not set price.

a neighbor on the local network (mDNS-discovered) offers headers at near-zero cost. a peer across the planet charges more. the header market creates the same geographic hierarchy that location proof formalizes — without requiring location proof infrastructure to be operational first.

recursive zheng headers

with recursive zheng composition, a new node does not need the full header chain. it needs one recursive proof (~100-200 KB) covering the entire chain from genesis, plus the latest header. the cost of syncing from genesis is the cost of purchasing and verifying one proof — seconds of compute, kilobytes of data.

this proof is itself a saleable artifact. a node that maintains the recursive chain proof can sell "instant sync" to new participants at a premium over raw header-by-header sync.

cyberlink propagation: narrowcast to aggregators

a neuron creates a cyberlink. who needs it?

the flow

neuron creates cyberlink
        │
        ▼
signs link with neuron key
        │
        ▼
sends directly to aggregator(s) serving this namespace
        │
        ▼
aggregator:
  1. verifies signature
  2. verifies neuron has sufficient focus
  3. includes in block
  4. produces zheng proof of correct inclusion
  5. publishes block header (epidemic — 232 bytes)
  6. publishes erasure-coded block data to DA layer
        │
        ▼
namespace subscribers pull their slice + completeness proof
        │
        ▼
DAS verifiers sample random chunks (sparse, probabilistic)

the cyberlink itself travels one hop: neuron → aggregator. the header travels epidemically (but it is 232 bytes). the block data is erasure-coded and sampled, not downloaded in full by anyone except the aggregator.

aggregator discovery

Aggregators are node services serving specific namespaces. Their controlling neurons advertise the service, endpoint and authority policy via cyberlinks. A single service can use several progs or subjects, and one subject can authorize several services:

~aggregator/serves → particle(namespace: "biology")
~aggregator/serves → particle(namespace: "defi")

a neuron creating a biology cyberlink resolves ~*/serves/biology to find active aggregators for that namespace. multiple aggregators may serve the same namespace — redundancy without epidemic broadcast.

aggregators earn fees for inclusion (sender pays — the neuron creating the link). competition between aggregators for the same namespace keeps fees low and inclusion fast.

focus propagation: signals as φ* updates

The proposed distributed-focus profile carries locally computed $\Delta\phi^*$ updates for batches of cyberlinks, bound to state and computation evidence. It must define how accepted updates converge to the focus distribution φ*, including conflicts, duplicate delivery, stale roots and proof coverage.

proposed focus-update envelope

This sketch describes application information, not a replacement for any existing signed Signal codec. A profile must define its exact signed bytes and domain separation before use.

signal {
    neuron:     subject_reference          identity domain + native identifier
    network:    network_reference          exact destination
    request:    replay_identity            retained through retries
    links:      [cyberlink]                one or more 5-tuple assertions
    pi_delta:   [(particle_id, Δφ*)]        sparse focus update for the batch
    proof:      zheng                       proof of correct local computation
    at:         authenticated_state_root
    authority:  authentication_and_grant    binds exact envelope
}

the pi_delta covers particles within the neuron's O(log(1/ε))-hop neighborhood. the locality theorem guarantees effects beyond that radius are below ε. the proof references a specific bbg_root from a header the neuron has verified. a single proof covers the entire batch of links — proving $n$ links together costs less than $n$ separate proofs because shared neighborhood state is proved once.

how φ* converges without central computation

neuron queries neighborhood φ* + edges (with proofs from any peer)
    │
    ▼
creates cyberlinks, runs local tri-kernel step for the batch
    │
    ▼
produces zheng proof: "this pi_delta follows from
  applying my links to the graph at bbg_root_t"
    │
    ▼
bundles into signal, sends to aggregator
    │
    ▼
aggregator applies pi_delta to local φ* view
    │
    ▼
namespace subscribers receive signal, apply pi_delta
    │
    ▼
their future signals carry updated pi_deltas
    │
    ▼
φ* emerges from convergence of all local proven updates

This is a proposed distributed belief-propagation scheme. The tri-kernel contraction argument (§5.6 of the whitepaper) must be connected to this concrete update protocol: a proof of one local step alone does not establish that stale, repeated or conflicting deltas can be applied in arbitrary order. Admission, revision checks, scheduling and boundary synchronization are part of the convergence obligation.

self-minting

The proposal lets a $\Delta\phi^*$ proof support a reward claim. Issuance must verify the complete reward rule, its unique attribution and conservation bound; a positive local delta alone grants no minting authority. See §14.2 of the whitepaper for the proposed conservation constraint and attribution mechanism.

a neuron on a phone: buy a header, query neighborhood state, create cyberlinks, prove Δφ*, bundle into a cyber/signal, mint tokens. the device that creates knowledge is the device that earns from it.

data availability: sampling without global knowledge

the full network does not store or download block data. data availability is verified probabilistically through DAS (Data Availability Sampling).

the aggregator erasure-codes each block's cyberlinks and publishes the coded chunks. DAS verifiers — any node, including light clients — sample random chunks and verify them against the block header's DA commitment. if enough random samples succeed, the data is available with high probability.

block data (N cyberlinks)
        │
        ▼
erasure coding (2N coded chunks)
        │
        ▼
chunks distributed to nearby peers
        │
        ▼
DAS verifiers sample k random chunks
        │
        ▼
if k/k pass → data available with probability 1 - (1/2)^k

with k = 30 samples, the probability of falsely confirming availability is $< 10^{-9}$. each sample is a single chunk (~256 bytes) plus a Merkle proof (~1 KB). total DAS cost per block per verifier: ~30 KB.

the BBG's namespace structure enables namespace-aware DAS: a subscriber sampling "give me everything for namespace N" receives data plus a completeness proof — cryptographic certainty that nothing was withheld.

gossip topology

radio/gossip (HyParView + PlumTree) provides the transport for both epidemic header broadcast and narrowcast topic delivery.

topic structure

the critical distinction: only the headers topic uses epidemic broadcast. all other topics are narrowcast — delivery to subscribers only, no flooding.

header propagation latency

headers are the only epidemic artifact. for a global network:

• header size: 232 bytes
• expected hops: O(log N) via broadcast tree
• per-hop latency: ~50-100ms (intercontinental QUIC)
• for 10,000 nodes: ~13 hops, ~0.4-1.3s total

this is the foculus finality budget. the header is the finality signal. everything else arrives later, on demand.

the cybergraph as its own routing table

the cybergraph encodes which neurons are interested in which particles. a neuron that has created many cyberlinks involving biology particles is interested in biology links. the focus distribution $\phi^*$ provides a natural routing metric.

interest-based peering

nodes maintain connections to peers whose focus distributions overlap with their own:

$$\text{peering\_affinity}(A, B) = \sum_{p \in P} \min(\phi^*_A(p), \phi^*_B(p))$$

The overlap coefficient of the two normalized focus distributions. High affinity means shared attention on the same particles. The gossip layer can bias its partial peer view toward high affinity while retaining diversity and liveness requirements; relevant cyberlinks then arrive from peers serving the same subgraph.

semantic routing

a query "what connects malaria to treatment?" does not flood the network. the querying node identifies high-focus particles in the relevant subgraph, finds neurons with high karma there, and routes the query toward those neurons.

query arrives
    │
    ▼
local node checks local cybergraph view
    │
    ├── sufficient data? → respond locally (with proof)
    │
    └── insufficient? → route to high-affinity peers
                              │
                              ▼
                        peers with high φ* on
                        query-relevant particles
                              │
                              ▼
                        response + proof flows back

the response includes a proof against the BBG root. the querying node verifies without trusting the responder.

sybil resistance

the network layer inherits sybil resistance from the cybergraph's stake-weighted structure:

• peer discovery via cybergraph: endpoint claims are stake-weighted. a sybil neuron with zero stake has zero weight in peer discovery
• paid headers: a node with no tokens cannot sync the chain, let alone flood it
• aggregator economics: submitting invalid cyberlinks to an aggregator costs focus and accumulates negative karma via Bayesian Truth Serum scoring. the aggregator drops invalid links before inclusion
• relay reciprocity: BitTorrent-style tit-for-tat in the gossip layer. nodes that contribute nothing receive nothing

creating 1000 sybil neurons with zero stake produces zero influence on the network. the cost of disrupting aggregation is the cost of acquiring sufficient stake to create high-weight links — the same economic security bound as foculus consensus.

consistency model

the network operates under partial synchrony: messages arrive within an unknown but finite bound $\Delta$.

required guarantees under the selected profile

• safety: consensus evidence prevents conflicting finalized state under the selected foculus assumptions
• completeness verification: authenticated openings cover the requested namespace at the stated root under the BBG proof profile
• data availability: sampling meets the declared probability bound, sampling independence and withholding/adversary assumptions

what is not guaranteed

• real-time propagation of cyberlinks: during partitions, links may be delayed to aggregators
• ordered delivery: links may arrive at the aggregator out of creation order. the aggregator determines inclusion order

During partitions, nodes retain their authenticated tips and unresolved requests. The consensus profile determines which domains can safely advance and which cross-domain operations must wait. Reconnection reconciles original requests; local commit and remote acceptance remain distinct from finality. Full, partial and light nodes enforce their respective verification duties.

bandwidth budget

the narrowcast model radically reduces bandwidth compared to epidemic broadcast:

a minimal node (headers + DAS only): ~30 KB/s. a namespace aggregator: proportional to namespace activity. no node downloads the full block data unless it chooses to.

focus-based prioritization: when an aggregator is overloaded, it prioritizes links from high-karma neurons targeting high-focus particles. low-priority links queue. the network's attention structure organizes its own traffic.

connection to fractal architecture

the narrowcast model maps naturally onto the fractal consensus layers (see cyber/architecture):

• L0 (local): direct QUIC connections. aggregators receive cyberlinks from local neurons. massive bandwidth, no consensus overhead
• L1 (neighborhood): aggregators within geographic/semantic clusters coordinate. local BFT among ~10-100 nodes
• L2 (shard): cross-cluster aggregator reconciliation. shard-level state roots
• L3 (global): header chain only. recursive zheng proofs. ~232 bytes per block. the 64 KB blockchain

the header market's geographic price differentiation — neighbors are cheaper — creates the same clustering that location proof formalizes. the network self-organizes into layers before anyone designs the layers.

see radio for the transport layer. see radio/gossip for the broadcast tree protocol. see radio/discovery for bootstrap mechanisms. see cyber/communication for private messaging and proof of delivery. see cyber/architecture for relay pricing and emergent hierarchy. see foculus for consensus over the header chain. see cyber/light for the light client that consumes this protocol