>> 1. A strong convention is needed for the descriptors, so that there is some >> chance of finding the content. I'm not sure that this can be left to chance, >> and maybe at least the top levels need to be defined - maybe something like >> the Dewey Decimal system.
>Yes, a first stab at specifying some descriptor conventions can be found at: http://freenet.sourceforge.net/index.php?page=key_const I saw that, and the comment extending it for classical music. However that is only a small part of possible content. How would I describe episode 113 of the Simpsons, or a PGP key ring or any of the other things I might want to access? >> 2. Some way of finding out what content exists for a specific category, for >> example an intelligent search agent. >There is right now an ongoing argument about how to do searching. =) I'd be happy to join in. Ive done some work on using fuzzy logic for TV program guides that might be relevant. >> 3. Some form of discipline for the namespace. First-come-first-served has >> been a disaster for the web, and some mechanism is needed to prevent abuse, >> for example by flooding all of a category with placeholder documents. >There are a couple of competing proposals here, either by using some type >of user confirmation/voting mechanism to decide which document has the >"right" to a name, or by a two-level naming system where a >human-understandable key leads to a set of references to approximately >unique non-understandable keys (corresponding to content hashes of >different documents, for example). There is a corresponding debate in IETF, and an extra level buys you some things, but still leads to the problem of resolving conflicts and preventing flooding in the human-understandable space. It's a hard problem. >> 4. "distance" needs to take into account strength of the connection >This has been talked about a little, but there is also the problem that you >don't just want to go to the closest node to look for the data, you want to >go to the node which is close and is most likely to have the data. >Balancing these two issues is a problem. I agree. My point is that you need a QoS parameter as well that defines things like speed of link and resilience of node- not all links or nodes are equal. Do the methods used in distributed caches like Squid help any? >> 5. Can streaming media be supported? If so how? >I don't see why not, in principle. When an insert of a streamed file >reaches a node, it can make a note of it right away in its data store >(rather than wait until the file is complete). If someone else requests it >while the file is still being read in, the request is fed out from the top >of the file which has already been saved. >Once the file is complete, of course, no alteration is necessary. Clients >will just request it as usual and start interpreting it immediately as the >file arrives. I like that. I want to distribute TV pictures. You might want an option of not storing it at all - think of a Webcam, for example. You get the current version or none. Jack >theo _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
