On Sat, Nov 24, 2001 at 11:49:42AM +0000, toad wrote: > On Sat, Nov 24, 2001 at 03:23:45AM +0100, Oskar Sandberg wrote: < > > > I don't want any major new changes implemented until the current > > codebase works decently. It's not too difficult for somebody who > > understands Fred's internals (dump a task on the Ticker, write your own > > FeedbackToken and move into the request states) though. > > Most permanent nodes actually run on DSL/cable modems. Not having ARKs > means they have to reattach to the network regularly (unless they set up > dyndns's, which is the exception, not the rule). Doesn't this have a > negative effect on routing? You mean, in terms of direct bugs in the > codebase, not in terms of network upfuckage, then?
Clearly we have seen in the past that there are enough nodes that somewhat permament that the network CAN work a hell of a lot better than then it is now, even without transient address lookup (people may be on DSL/Cable, but many use DynDNS). Another reason that I think this is not an oppertune time to do it is that we have the current network mostly for testing, and it would be very interesting to see how much of a difference ARKs make (if any) when implemented. You are unlikely to make any such observation in the current quagmire of a network... > > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl at freenetproject.org > http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl -- Oskar Sandberg oskar at freenetproject.org _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl at freenetproject.org http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
