Whitepaper - Decentralized Internet Protocol

[mi-nadir]

Hi everyone!

I’m excited to share my conceptual whitepaper “KeyNet: A Key-Bound Decentralized Internet Protocol”, which explores a vision of a truly decentralized Internet.

KeyNet proposes a network architecture built on cryptographically bound IPv6 addressing, independent backbone nodes, and a blockchain-based governance and economy. The goal is to eliminate dependence on traditional ISPs and centralized DNS systems while keeping data transmission completely free.

Key ideas include:

• IPv6 addresses derived from public keys (address = identity).
• Backbone nodes handling routing, DNS, and blockchain validation.
• OpenWrt-based client nodes with a simple web interface.
• On-chain domain names and address ownership.
• A native token used for governance and smart contracts, not traffic charging.

The whitepaper outlines architecture, cryptographic addressing, node roles, and economic incentives for participants — aiming to create a censorship-resistant, community-governed network layer.

You can read the full whitepaper here: https://github.com/mi-nadir/keynet-whitepaper

I’d love to hear your thoughts, feedback, and questions on the concept!

[NotFuzzyWarm]

You would still need the ISP's and bulk data carriers as they are the connection to the internet: they own the local/national/international cables and cell networks. In many ways, they are the internet. No ad-hoc fully independent network system can ever efficiently replace them.

[mi-nadir]

You would still need the ISP's and bulk data carriers as they are the connection to the internet: they own the local/national/international cables and cell networks. In many ways, they are the internet. No ad-hoc fully independent network system can ever efficiently replace them.

Unfortunately, yes, this network will always be heavily dependent on the internet. The idea is rather to create an alternative, censorship-resistant, high-speed network that is completely controlled by the people themselves. Unfortunately, in many countries, authorities regularly shut down the internet and violate free speech, and such a network could solve this problem if people themselves participated in creating an alternative infrastructure. I believe this model makes it possible to build huge networks, even global ones.

[ABCbits]

I'll just ask 1 question, how it's better than using name server (such as Ethereum Name Server) which can map domain name with address and other data (including IPv4 and IPv6)?

[mi-nadir]

I'll just ask 1 question, how it's better than using name server (such as Ethereum Name Server) which can map domain name with address and other data (including IPv4 and IPv6)?

The DNS in my proposed network is similar to the option you described and any other DNS. It is in no way superior to other systems. Overall, the domain name system in this network is necessary for ease of use. The advantage of the network is the ability to create networks of enormous scale (in terms of infrastructure), the management of which is delegated to the community. In this network, the community alone decides which content to censor, and ideally, the network should remain operational without an internet connection by creating an alternative infrastructure. The network will operate exclusively via IPv6, but it will not interfere with internet operation in any way. Personally, I don't see a problem with the lack of IPv4, since the network does not provide the ability to provide internet access at the expense of other network participants. On the contrary, a completely autonomous network is envisioned, within which application owners will be able to duplicate access to their resources if desired, or provide them exclusively within the proposed network. In other words, the proposed network is an attempt to move Web3 from the software layer, which depends on the Internet, to the physical layer, when dependence on the Internet will decrease.

[LoyceV]

You would still need the ISP's and bulk data carriers

Unfortunately, yes, this network will always be heavily dependent on the internet.

In your whitepaper, you wrote: "capable of operating without traditional internet providers". If that's not the case, you should start by changing the name

I've seen Silicon Valley, I like the idea of a decentralized internet, but like most things that claim to be decentralized, it's not decentralized. It sounds like you're adding a blockchain to something that doesn't need a blockchain.

[mi-nadir]

You would still need the ISP's and bulk data carriers

Unfortunately, yes, this network will always be heavily dependent on the internet.

In your whitepaper, you wrote: "capable of operating without traditional internet providers". If that's not the case, you should start by changing the name

I've seen Silicon Valley, I like the idea of a decentralized internet, but like most things that claim to be decentralized, it's not decentralized. It sounds like you're adding a blockchain to something that doesn't need a blockchain.

The key difference between the existing Web3 and my proposed solution is that my version can, in theory, operate without the internet at all, even internationally, unlike other projects that operate exclusively over the internet. The problem is that it's unlikely that international cables for KeyNet will be built in the initial stages of the project's development, and it's likely they won't allow it. Therefore, there will certainly be a dependence on existing networks like the internet, but the goal of the project is to reduce this dependence.
Blockchain is necessary in this case to confirm ownership of domains/addresses, as well as to enable DNS functionality, where each backbone will have up-to-date and, most importantly, reliable information, which will be distributed decentrally, not by a single central authority.