On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 08:24:15PM +1000, Zem wrote: > Oskar Sandberg wrote: > > > I'm actually warming up the idea of making the address: > > > > physical address + fingerprint + number > > > > and having the node lookup: > > > > ARK(fingerprint , (number + 1)) > > > > should the connect fail (ARK is Address Resolution Key). > > I had been thinking more along the lines of making the address just > "fingerprint + number", and doing the above lookup if the connect fails > OR if the physical address is unknown. > > But you're right, there's a performance advantage to be had from > including the physical address. I can't think of any drawbacks.
Just a quick point - If you use IP addresses as identifiers you're really swimming against the tide. IP addresses are evolving to be strictly locators in a network topology, and losing the interface identifier function. This is especially true in IPV6. V6 is designed so that addresses can change easily and transparently, whenever there is a change in the route to a particular machine. This may take some time to fully play out, but it is definitely happening, because that's the only way known to make the IP network scale up the way it needs too. David Schutt _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
