> I thought one of the points of Freenet was to make it so that if some
> nodes are taken out of the network, all of the other nodes still can
> function as a network (publicly).  No node is dependant on any
> other.  With clusters, it seems that if *one* node, namely the gateway,
> is removed from the network, a large number of nodes now have lost
> access, and are in effect removed from the public network.

The point of Freenet is to create an uncensorable medium for publication.

With a cluster, if all of the gateways (yes, there can be more than
one. No one seems to notice this.) go down then one of the nodes in the
cluster has to become a gateway. So your point is entirely moot. If no one
wants to be a gateway then that is a social problem, not a design flaw.



_______________________________________________
Freenet-dev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev

Reply via email to