On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 01:06:26AM -0500, Brandon Wiley wrote:
OK, I'll try and track these down. My gut guess is that they won't be
GPL-compatible, but we'll see.
They don't have to be GPL-compatible. They just have to be freely
redistributable.
Yes they do. Not legally maybe, but we
They don't have to be GPL-compatible. They just have to be freely
redistributable.
Yes they do. Not legally maybe, but we are not distributing non-Free
software with this project.
Well, I disagree with your position. I think that not distributing
the collection classes is a pointless
Ian Clarke schrieb:
So it seems that Oskar and Tavin are now arguing that it is fine if
users download Freenet, start the installation, are manually directed by
the installation to the Freenet website where they can obtain some seed
node addresses which they must manually enter into the
Ian Clarke wrote:
So it seems that Oskar and Tavin are now arguing that it is fine if
users download Freenet, start the installation, are manually directed by
the installation to the Freenet website where they can obtain some seed
node addresses which they must manually enter into the
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 11:51:02AM -0400, Derek Glidden wrote:
I will tend to agree with Oskar and Tavin in this case.
It would be more useful if you actually explained why.
However, I am
definitely what one would consider a power user or megageek or
whatever term you want to use.
I
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 03:03:54PM +0200, Sebastian Sp?th wrote:
B The real issues at hand are 1) how do they get the list of nodes, and
B 2) how is the list of nodes generated.
I get the sense that obtaining the nodes is not the issue (for the
reasons you point out, people are implicitly
I have been looking at the way routing is done in the 0.3.9.x codebase,
specifically, Freenet.message.Request.sentToNextBest.
The current implementation isn't very robust in the face of transient
transport problems. The following scenario seems to happen quite often.
a) A node performs well
GJ == Gianni Johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
GJ c) The current implementation
GJ Freenet.message.Request.sentToNextBest gets
GJ ConnectFailedExceptions and tries ever more distant (in
GJ keyspace) refs, WITHOUT PAYING ATTENTION TO THE ADDRESS OF THE
GJ NODEREFS. refs
On Thursday 05 July 2001 14:56, MB wrote:
GJ == Gianni Johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
GJ c) The current implementation
GJ Freenet.message.Request.sentToNextBest gets
GJ ConnectFailedExceptions and tries ever more distant (in
GJ keyspace) refs, WITHOUT PAYING ATTENTION
GJ == Gianni Johansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
GJ OK. This was admittedly unclear.
GJ The issue is that successive requests get routed to the same
GJ (transiently unavailable) node in quick succession, causing
GJ all refs to get blown out of the DataStore.
So, N failed
N failed references = N failed requests
___
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
I would agree with Ian that it will be made easy/automatic
whether the current freenet apps support it or not.
I differ (I think) in that I think it must be safer than
just the one seed IP addr: I would vote for the strength-
in-numbers strategy proposed in a prior thread.
I think Dr.
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 11:08:21AM +0200, Oskar Sandberg wrote:
On Thu, Jul 05, 2001 at 01:06:26AM -0500, Brandon Wiley wrote:
OK, I'll try and track these down. My gut guess is that they won't be
GPL-compatible, but we'll see.
They don't have to be GPL-compatible. They just have
13 matches
Mail list logo
