cor - comparison to other protocols
Tor
Tor has a similar architecture concerning addresses and anonymity. The differences are:
- Tor runs "on top" of the internet using tcp and assumes that every node can reach every other node. Cor runs on top of layer 2.
- Tor is build for the sole purpose of building a privacy network. Cor is build for the purpose of being a way for building zero configuration networks. Privacy is a target feature, be cannot be provided to the same extend as Tor does.
On-demand/reactive routing
On demand routing or reactive routing means that you find find routes when you need them. The opposite is proactive routing, which means you find routes before you need them. You can do both on-demand and proactive routing for both ip and cor. However you cannot easily use existing routing protocols for cor. Even if the routing protocol does source routing, it cannot do the network discovery as it used to, but has to rely on new interfaces.
Dsrflow
Dsrflow lets the source choose a path between through the network as cor does. But it operates with ip addresses and does nothing to hide the source or destination. If you know of anybody who (tries to) implement this, please send me an email.