On Sat, May 17, 2003 at 02:08:00PM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Anyway, Next Gen routing will solve this problem - so why don't people > spend their energy on that rather than non-portable kludges?
How so? Next gen routing will prefer faster nodes if the node that is overloaded gets so slow as to lose its specialization advantage, but by that time it will be thoroughly overwhelmed. > > Ian. > > - -- > Ian Clarke ian at locut.us > Coordinator, The Freenet Project http://freenetproject.org/ > Founder, Locutus http://locut.us/ > Personal Homepage http://locut.us/ian/ > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) > Comment: Debian :: The Universal Operating System > > iD8DBQE+xqSwQtgxRWSmsqwRAiljAJ9HwdJwI7pHgFXAnuJRUuU4VYPV6gCdEolx > ZSoIEGZUTTqQn6v92ZnDNfM= > =vlkj > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > _______________________________________________ > devl mailing list > devl at freenetproject.org > http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20030517/2fab4e91/attachment.pgp>
