Thank you for clarifying.. If that were the case, then might it not make sense to make Multiplexing work properly with both sets of connections, test it in a separate homogenous network, test it in a seperate network with old nodes, move it to unstable, let people upgrade for a while, make sure there are no problems with it in the real network, move it to stable, then up the Last Good Build to require it?
Colin
On Oct 15, 2003, at 3:29 PM, Toad wrote:
It would certainly be possible to implement multiplexing in a backwards compatible way. HOWEVER, at some point we would want to make multiplexing mandatory, because the old way of dealing with connections is so damaging. And for various other reasons it seems a network fork/reset would not be a bad thing at this point in time.
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
One possible idea, though not necessarily a very good one, is to make the default freenet installation two separate nodes, one stable and one unstable (with standard ports to distinguish them). Encourage people to use both for insertions (possibly simultaneously), and indeed to try both for accessing data (probably sequentially), but make them work on two mutually incompatible networks. Configuration operations that made them small enough in resource terms to both fit on the average computer would be necessary, but this must be possible. If the current Fred uses 120 to 300 MB rather than 12GB of memory, it must be possible to cut it to 50MB or so.
OK, it might be confusing. -- Roger Hayter _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
