* Jano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-05-14 11:21:05]: > > Personally I'm pretty skeptical of anything requiring more than 100MB. > > However, current implementation (IINM) uses the cache to resume downloads. > Thus, downloading anything bigger than that in more than one go has the > potential of a lot of waste in retries (hence BW & time). > > I know, it's a spurious reason since downloads in progress could be saved > somewhere else until completion... but still is a reason for now. >
They are good reasons why we shouldn't implement download-resuming.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
