On 6/27/06, Ruud Javi <rama333 at hotmail.com> wrote: > >Do we want semi-opennet support? This would be a way to connect, with > >mutual advance consent, to peers of our direct peers? (There would be > >measures taken to ensure that we don't connect to peers of their direct > >peers). > > Well, I am not sure but I am not a fan of it. > > Semi-opennet to me sounds like the worst of two worlds. The idea of darknet > is that you need tot trust your neighbors, but you are pretty safe to > everyone else. I think a semi-opennet would give a less safe network, > because people are connecting to people they have not added them selves. My > guess is that people would turn it on because it would make Freenet faster, > while it would also make it less safe for them imho. > > Further, you would still need to add some connections, so this would not > bring in the big user group that is looking for an opennet-version of > Freenet .7 at all. > > If you have some special reasons/ arguments for this semi-opennet, please > post. If you want we could discuss about if there should be an opennet in > Freenet .7 , and how it should look like. I have some other ideas to get > people to freenet .7 that wants an opennet. Unfortunately I am already > seeing a few weak points, so other idea's might be better :) > > greetings, > Ruud >
It sounded really nice but I think you're right, this would be a bad idea. > _________________________________________________________________ > Play online games with your friends with MSN Messenger > http://www.join.msn.com/messenger/overview > > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl at freenetproject.org > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl >
