On Thu, 17 Aug 2000, Oskar Sandberg wrote: > There is also the very real issue that ISPs will very probably start > shifting ip addresses more often even when it is technically unnecessary, > so as to avoid services like Freenet should we be successful. > > It is a real shame for the Internet in general that it is developing in > the direction where even users who could be are not granted a permanent > point of presence. Another one in the long list of dooming factors for the > Internet - when we are done with Freenet it will be about time to start > working on a full replacement. >
Have I not done my homework (i.e. read this list) or is dynamic dns (which is to be had for free) the answer to this? -- Marc Schneiders ------- Venster - http://www.venster.nl |marc at venster.nl - marc at bijt.net - marc at schneiders.org| A sleepless night's thoughts : http://www.freecopy.org > On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 09:21:47AM -0500, david at aminal.com wrote: > > 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 > > > > -- > \oskar > _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
