I only agree in one point, that we don't agree... > Do you know what the default HTL is on .7 ?
Insert? Minimum or average? > May I express my doubts? I'm not > convinced that we should think in terms of "bandwith"... There are two > different things : "bandwith" used in between nodes and overall insert speed; > What are you talking about ? In fact I think it is both, but I have only tested the insert speed, so I only talk about this. > fight against spamming, it takes more time to fec encode than to decode, > you've > to insert more blocks than what you need when you request the same key, ... > rejection probabilities are higher on inserts as paths are longer and they > are cumulative. I suggest you take a break and think about it :) In an empty network (testnet) the reject probability should be near zero. And maybe we should prioritize inserts on crowded nodes... > The purpose of freenet isn't to be an efficient way to insert warez : inserts > speed aren't going to be as fast as they could be on other p2p softwares. In other networks there are no INSERTS at all. and surely they use the UPLOAD as much as they can and freenet should do so. > There is currently a known problem : inserts are so slow that it doesn't give > users a good experience. This problem is beeing addressed but atm we don't > have > any working solution, maybe you can help and suggest something insteed of > whining about insert speeds ? IF I would whine, I would do that on #freenet, the discussion input was "that" inserts can be as fast as downloads. Which still is true, because you deliver no reason against it. maybe you already discussed the "known problem" but my viewpoint might be intersting, obviously it isnt to you. BTW I inserted 1 file upto now, which was terribly slow and stopped it after a few hundred KB. People which really insert, will whine enough... If tech or devel you read it anyway don't you? But I can disappear as fast as I appeared if input from a different viewpoint isnt wished.
