On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 08:15:26PM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote: > On Saturday 25 January 2003 15:07, you wrote: > > > 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems > > > undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is. > > > > I agree - that is what plugin architectures are for. > What do you mean? > > When you add a servlet to the mainport configuration setting you are running > it in fred's JVM. > > Where else are people plugging things in? > > > > > > 2) How do you plan to address QOS? I have asked this question several > > > times and each time it is ignored. > > > If you really want to do streaming you need to have a reasonable QOS > > > gaurantee. I don't see how you are going to get this from fred. > > > > Increasingly, streaming protocols operate over TCP - what QOS guarantee > > does TCP offer? > At least the lower bounds can be charcterized. Perhaps you could help do the > same for freenet. See below. > > > Such streaming protocols address this using buffering, > > there is no reason why we can't do the same. > The latencies in Freenet are orders of magnitude larger. > > I would be interested in a principled analysis of what it would take to make > this really work. How much buffering? What minimum average rate? > > > > > Again, you have no more evidence. > Well I have never seen 30k/sec sustained average transfer rate for a recently > inserted SplitFiles. > > > that it won't work than I do that it > > will. > > > Why not encourage someone to try it so that we can all find out? > > Nothing ventured, nothing gained. > I don't think I could stop fish if I wanted to, which I don't. Pointing out > that the Freenet architecture provides no QOS, is not what I would > characterize as discouragement. It's more like technical due diligence. > > > Why not encourage people to do things which have a reason > > Personally I am optimistic, with > > Splitfiles I have been seeing overall download rates of around 30k/sec, > > which is more than enough for a FM quality ogg stream. > Which SplitFiles? What tests have you run? > > That is about 5 to 10 times the speed I see for non-established SplitFiles. > > And higher than the average transfer I see even for most established ones. > > Why don't you organize some tests of SplitFIle retrieval rates? That way the > discussion would be less anecdotal. > > I am hindered in my testing by the lack of publically available "legitimate" > -- not porn, not copyright infringing -- SplitFiles. Having a bunch of small > known (1 - 64M) SplitFiles in the network would be really useful.
Maybe the apt-get over freenet project? :) Fish has some old code that does something like this... > > If you (or anyone else) wants to insert insert some stuff, use > freenet.client.cli.Main. It's the only client I am aware of that supports > checksumming. Don't use fproxy. It doesn't use the new AutoRequester > SplitFile insertion code yet. > > --gj > > > > > Ian. -- Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] Full time freenet hacker. http://freenetproject.org/ Freenet Distribution Node (temporary) at http://amphibian.dyndns.org:8889/dbS0eicAn1o/ ICTHUS.
msg06386/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
