> I'm not sure what he's talking about either. And handling unknown fields > is also rigorously defined in the spec already. And as I've said before, > Freenet protocol IS typed: field names are types.
Right, handling unknown fields is defined. I'm saying that it has to be changed if we want to be able to have a single node speak both typed and untyped protocols. What do you mean when you say field names are types? When I say types I mean number, boolean, string, etc.. The current Freenet protocol has every value as being a string. So the protocol is untyped. The internal representation of the message, on the other hand, is typed. Oskar's binary protocol is typed, meaning that each field value is either a number, boolean, string, or whatever and the different types are represented differently in the protocol. We need some way to make the two protocols interoperable. Oskar wants to make the text protocol typed, in the sense of my previous use of the word. I'd prefer that the text protocol be untyped but we still allow for typed protocols. _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
