On Thu, 28 Dec 2000, Benjamin Coates wrote:
> >From Travis Bemann <bemann@bemann>
> >There has been lots of discussion on using stuff like mapfiles/MSKs to
> >handle pseudoupdating. However, pseudoupdating is just a temporary
> >measure that will be obsoleted by real updating. So why don't we not
> >waste our time working on a temporary measure and instead actually try
> >testing pass-through and selective-broadcast updates with Serapis and
> >then actually implement the better of the two updating schemes?! If
> >we did this right now we might be able to get real updating in Freenet
> >0.4, but if we work on the temporary measure of mapfiles, real
> >updating will probably not be in Freenet 0.4 and will wait to Freenet
> >0.5.
> >
> >--
> >Travis Bemann
>
> Unless there are serious performance issues with the date-based redirect and
> MSK combination, I do not see a reason to implement real* updating at all.
Irregular update intervals. That's the only reason.
> * I'm not entirely clear what the difference between "real" and "fake"
> updating is, however.
>
> --
> Benjamin Coates
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Freenet-dev mailing list
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
>
--
Mark Roberts
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
_______________________________________________
Freenet-dev mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
