On 6/28/06, Ian Clarke <ian at revver.com> wrote: > On 27 Jun 2006, at 23:52, Thomas Bruderer wrote: > >> I agree that we need to simulate it to ensure that destination > >> sampling (aka LRU) can co-exist with location swapping, but that > >> should be a relatively straight-forward simulation, Oskar may even do > >> it for us > > > > One intersting note: > > > > Toad states: if there is an opennet, nobody would use the darknet... > > > > Well if there is no need for a darknet, why we talk about it? > > Either there is a > > need, and it was good you built a darknet. Or nobody wants a > > darknet and there > > never will be success with darknet. > > Well, I have never heard or read that Toad said that, but the > response to anyone that did say that is that the darknet is there so > that it is available to those that need it. If people don't need the > security offered by participating in a darknet, then they should use > the opennet. > > > If really nobody wants to use darknet, whats the point in keeping > > it with all > > forces? > > Even if most people don't need a darknet, it doesn't mean that nobody > needs a darknet. I would expect that the people that most need > Freenet probably need a darknet, but the majority of Freenet users > probably don't fall into that category.
I would rather have to bother a slight bit more to set up a darknet node than not if it mean those who really need it will be able to have it instead of just a bunch of small darknet and a huge opennet they can't use. > > > In fact I think toad is right, but my conclusion is completly > > different. Three > > months of 0.7 leads me to the conclusion that darknet is not a > > killer feature. > > Perhaps not, for you. > > Ian. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl at freenetproject.org > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl >
