On Wed, May 17, 2000 at 07:32:33PM -0500, Scott G. Miller wrote: > > As for alternate protocals going over Freenet, I realized that Freenet > > would be > > ideal for netnews distribution. This would require a set of new messages > > which > > are not currently part of the Freenet protocal. Note that these messages > > should be passed on if a node doesn't recognize or use them. They should > > also > > be caught and then passed on by nodes that use them. There are two > > different > > methods of distribution - push and pull. Push is used by nodes to send > > articles to other nodes. Pull is used by clients to request news articles > > from > > nodes. > > This is a perfectly good example of how NOT to use the freenet > protocol. To create a freenet application does NOT mean modify the > protocol. Usenet style news is very easily implemented without any > half-cooked modifications like this. All you need is search. >
That was a silly idea. NNTP already exists, and there is little or no reason to replace it. But if you did want to have netnews over Freenet (with the advantages of Freenet), the idea would be to copy header information from the message itself (it should still be in standard netnews format - or otherwise it would break all existing news software completely) into the metadata, to allow searching by newsgroup, date, from, subject, etc. There should also be a standard key format of: news/<message id> where <message id> is in standard netnews message id format. Keys should not indicate what newsgroup the message was posted to because netnews articles can be posted to multiple newsgroups. Is this a much better idea than my other proposal (yes - I know it was crockish)? -- Travis Bemann Sendmail is still screwed up on my box. My email address is really bemann at execpc.com. _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
