Re: [freenet-support] idea
On Friday 25 Feb 2011 19:53:49 folkert wrote: > > > > We did think about an "is the lan trusted?" option some time ago. This > > would both announce and open FCP and Fproxy. Unfortunately defining "the > > lan" is hard, when big untrusted NATed networks (e.g. ISPs in russia etc) > > often use private address space, and autodetecting it *reliably* is also > > hard. > > You could make it configurable. Default: do not trust. That was the whole idea. Unfortunately even detecting the LAN reliably isn't that easy. It's possible, of course, but you end up with lots of convoluted possibilities, and asking users questions that they probably don't know the answer to ... > > > You should however peer with the other computers on your LAN, if you know > > their operators, of course. Which hopefully you do if the LAN is trusted! > > Troublesome if everybody's on dhcp. Right, we would need to be able to bind to a range rather than an IP (pick any local interface in that range)... signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
> > > What about that the freenet daemon periodically > > > (configurable/disable-ble of course) announces itself on the lan(s) to > > > which it is connected? That way freenet-nodes can interconnect and > > > speed up distribution of data. > > There is a plugin: > MDNSDiscovery. > This uses it to announce FCP, but you still need to open FCP to the LAN... Or plugin to avahi. > > Data distribution on Freenet doesn't work like that. Data segments are > > actually spread all across Freenet, ideally with no particular peer > > having a large portion of a large splitfile. I don't think having fast > > random LAN connections would speed things up -- the bottleneck will > > still be the LAN's connection to the Internet. (Not to mention the fact > > that it would be at least somewhat less secure. (Better chance of > > traffic analysis and such tricks against you.)) > > We did think about an "is the lan trusted?" option some time ago. This would > both announce and open FCP and Fproxy. Unfortunately defining "the lan" is > hard, when big untrusted NATed networks (e.g. ISPs in russia etc) often use > private address space, and autodetecting it *reliably* is also hard. You could make it configurable. Default: do not trust. > You should however peer with the other computers on your LAN, if you know > their operators, of course. Which hopefully you do if the LAN is trusted! Troublesome if everybody's on dhcp. Folkert van Heusden -- MultiTail na wan makriki wrokosani fu tan luku den logfile nanga san den commando spiti puru. Piki puru spesrutu sani, wroko nanga difrenti kroru, tya kon makandra, nanga wan lo moro. http://www.vanheusden.com/multitail/ -- Phone: +31-6-41278122, PGP-key: 1F28D8AE, www.vanheusden.com ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
On Saturday 19 Feb 2011 19:24:30 Edzard Pasma wrote: > > Op 19-feb-2011, om 18:21 heeft folkert het volgende geschreven: > > >>> Ok, that was not your point :-) Ok currently maybe not too many > >>> nodes > >>> in the net but maybe this changes when governments restrict > >>> access to > >>> what you can browse. Here in Europe governments already start > >>> talking > >>> about installing filters. > >> > >> This is why you /don't/ want any kind of broadcasting, or any other > >> kind of leak of identifiable traffic. Just encrypted non-identifiable > >> "noise". > > > > Then we definately need a solution around the seed nodes. I mean > > traffic > > going to them is a big fat warning that someone is doing freenet :-) > > > > Folkert van Heusden > > > The seednodes might then once be blocked by authorities in their > struggle against the evil. The solution seems to have as many > potential seednodes as their are users. Thus one automatically > becomes one after a while. The other way around, any foreigner is > then a potential seednode. Adddresses can dynamically be collected to > be used at a next start. Automatically harvesting seednodes is a possibility. The problems with it are: 1. Many nodes have low uptime. This can be detected. 2. Many nodes have poor connectivity (NATed without port forwarding). This can be detected but is some additional work to be automated and reliable. 3. They could block *ALL* the seednodes. If we do what Tor did and have a server that sends you a small number of seeds out of the global collection, they can still harvest them using lots of gmail addresses, IP addresses etc. This is what the Chinese did with Tor. Note that a gmail address is just a CAPTCHA, and these can be solved in bulk cheaply. 3. Opennet is inherently harvestable: Even if we distribute the seednodes and take all other precautions, it is feasible to find all nodes in order to block them. 4. Opennet is grossly insecure. It may be possible to improve this a bit against an attacker who is not able to connect to all nodes, surround groups of nodes gradually and so on, but IMHO really good security on opennet is very unlikely. Viva darknet! signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
On Friday 18 Feb 2011 19:40:59 Dennis Nezic wrote: > On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 19:01:10 +0100, folkert wrote: > > What about that the freenet daemon periodically > > (configurable/disable-ble of course) announces itself on the lan(s) to > > which it is connected? That way freenet-nodes can interconnect and > > speed up distribution of data. > > Data distribution on Freenet doesn't work like that. Data segments are > actually spread all across Freenet, ideally with no particular peer > having a large portion of a large splitfile. I don't think having fast > random LAN connections would speed things up -- the bottleneck will > still be the LAN's connection to the Internet. (Not to mention the fact > that it would be at least somewhat less secure. (Better chance of > traffic analysis and such tricks against you.)) If the requests are served from the other node's cache then the risk against a distant attacker is significantly reduced. The risk against that other node increases, of course - this is the tradeoff. Bottom line, more friends is better if it means you can turn off opennet, and if you do actually know them (even if you don't trust them absolutely, they're still better than opennet). signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
On Friday 18 Feb 2011 19:40:59 Dennis Nezic wrote: > On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 19:01:10 +0100, folkert wrote: > > What about that the freenet daemon periodically > > (configurable/disable-ble of course) announces itself on the lan(s) to > > which it is connected? That way freenet-nodes can interconnect and > > speed up distribution of data. There is a plugin: MDNSDiscovery. This uses it to announce FCP, but you still need to open FCP to the LAN... I think this is also possible with UPnP. Not sure if we use it there. > > Data distribution on Freenet doesn't work like that. Data segments are > actually spread all across Freenet, ideally with no particular peer > having a large portion of a large splitfile. I don't think having fast > random LAN connections would speed things up -- the bottleneck will > still be the LAN's connection to the Internet. (Not to mention the fact > that it would be at least somewhat less secure. (Better chance of > traffic analysis and such tricks against you.)) We did think about an "is the lan trusted?" option some time ago. This would both announce and open FCP and Fproxy. Unfortunately defining "the lan" is hard, when big untrusted NATed networks (e.g. ISPs in russia etc) often use private address space, and autodetecting it *reliably* is also hard. You should however peer with the other computers on your LAN, if you know their operators, of course. Which hopefully you do if the LAN is trusted! signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
On Sat, 19 Feb 2011 20:24:30 +0100, Edzard Pasma wrote: > > Op 19-feb-2011, om 18:21 heeft folkert het volgende geschreven: > > >>> Ok, that was not your point :-) Ok currently maybe not too many > >>> nodes > >>> in the net but maybe this changes when governments restrict > >>> access to > >>> what you can browse. Here in Europe governments already start > >>> talking > >>> about installing filters. > >> > >> This is why you /don't/ want any kind of broadcasting, or any other > >> kind of leak of identifiable traffic. Just encrypted > >> non-identifiable "noise". > > > > Then we definately need a solution around the seed nodes. I mean > > traffic > > going to them is a big fat warning that someone is doing freenet :-) > > > > > > Folkert van Heusden > > > The seednodes might then once be blocked by authorities in their > struggle against the evil. The solution seems to have as many > potential seednodes as their are users. Thus one automatically > becomes one after a while. The other way around, any foreigner is > then a potential seednode. Adddresses can dynamically be collected > to be used at a next start. Again, this is why darknet mode was implemented. There are no seednodes in darknet, only friends you know and trust, and that cannot be identified. (I believe Freenet 0.7 was intended to be a darknet, and opennet (i.e. how Freenet 0.5 operates) was only later added to make things easier for newbies.) ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
Op 19-feb-2011, om 18:21 heeft folkert het volgende geschreven: Ok, that was not your point :-) Ok currently maybe not too many nodes in the net but maybe this changes when governments restrict access to what you can browse. Here in Europe governments already start talking about installing filters. This is why you /don't/ want any kind of broadcasting, or any other kind of leak of identifiable traffic. Just encrypted non-identifiable "noise". Then we definately need a solution around the seed nodes. I mean traffic going to them is a big fat warning that someone is doing freenet :-) Folkert van Heusden The seednodes might then once be blocked by authorities in their struggle against the evil. The solution seems to have as many potential seednodes as their are users. Thus one automatically becomes one after a while. The other way around, any foreigner is then a potential seednode. Adddresses can dynamically be collected to be used at a next start. Edzard Pasma. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
> > Ok, that was not your point :-) Ok currently maybe not too many nodes > > in the net but maybe this changes when governments restrict access to > > what you can browse. Here in Europe governments already start talking > > about installing filters. > > This is why you /don't/ want any kind of broadcasting, or any other > kind of leak of identifiable traffic. Just encrypted non-identifiable > "noise". Then we definately need a solution around the seed nodes. I mean traffic going to them is a big fat warning that someone is doing freenet :-) Folkert van Heusden -- Multi tail barnamaj mowahib li mora9abat attasjilat wa nataij awamir al 7asoub. damj, talwin, mora9abat attarchi7 wa ila akhirih. http://www.vanheusden.com/multitail/ -- Phone: +31-6-41278122, PGP-key: 1F28D8AE, www.vanheusden.com ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 21:35:00 +0100, folkert wrote: > Well I was thinking maybe in the future we're all using mesh > networking over wifi (or whatever wireless protocol we then have). > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesh_networking Freenet-Darknet should work wonderfully over such a network :). (Well, assuming you're not roaming. And that the meshes aren't too isolated :p). > Ok, that was not your point :-) Ok currently maybe not too many nodes > in the net but maybe this changes when governments restrict access to > what you can browse. Here in Europe governments already start talking > about installing filters. This is why you /don't/ want any kind of broadcasting, or any other kind of leak of identifiable traffic. Just encrypted non-identifiable "noise". > Currently only for kiddy porn but I'm afraid that when such a filter > is in place the step to block certain political views or so is much > smaller. Obviously. Their (Statist's) worst enemy is the free flow of information. > It is also a matter of convenience. If I visit some conference I don't > want to be hassled with the need of configuring all kinds of software > just to get "work done". It's a tradeoff -- ease-of-use and anonymity. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
> Normal people (your neighbour so to say) start to know these things like > FreeNet/Tor. This week there was an item on national television in the > Netherlands about how Tor helps oppressed people to get their > opinions/news items/etc. out! Oh it was also a rather positive news item. http://nos.nl/artikel/219423-tor-digitale-solidariteit-met-middenoosten.html Folkert van Heusden -- Multitail es una herramienta flexible que permite visualizar los "log file" y seguir la ejecución de comandos. Permite filtrar, añadir colores, combinar archivos, la visualización de diferencias (diff- view), etc. http://www.vanheusden.com/multitail/ -- Phone: +31-6-41278122, PGP-key: 1F28D8AE, www.vanheusden.com ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
> > True, but it can be used to find a way to other nodes further down the > > path. This way one doesn't need to connect to the central seednodes to > > find ways to reach the global network/the rest of the freenet network. > > Ah, for initial connection to Freenet that might be useful, although I > don't think it'll be used too often. (I have trouble finding Freenet > friends in my entire city -- let alone in my LAN :p.) You can add known Well I was thinking maybe in the future we're all using mesh networking over wifi (or whatever wireless protocol we then have). http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesh_networking Currently nobody is preventing you to anonymously buy a wifi card (with a non-registered mac address - some cards even enable you to change it) so then you could hook into the mesh without anyone knowing it is you. Ok, that was not your point :-) Ok currently maybe not too many nodes in the net but maybe this changes when governments restrict access to what you can browse. Here in Europe governments already start talking about installing filters. Currently only for kiddy porn but I'm afraid that when such a filter is in place the step to block certain political views or so is much smaller. Normal people (your neighbour so to say) start to know these things like FreeNet/Tor. This week there was an item on national television in the Netherlands about how Tor helps oppressed people to get their opinions/news items/etc. out! > (and trustworthy) lan members to your list of darknet-friends, and > connect that way to Freenet without using any seednodes. Or you can > modify your seednodes.fref file by only including references to your > LAN nodes. It is also a matter of convenience. If I visit some conference I don't want to be hassled with the need of configuring all kinds of software just to get "work done". For that DHCP is too centralised (centralised == bad). > It's also not a good idea to be able to broadcast to anyone that you're > using Freenet. (To prevent them from blacklisting you, et cetera.) (The > whole point of Darknet mode was to make this impossible.) If I'm at a conference, i don't have to register my mac address. So I setup my wifi, connect to tor for regular internet traffic and freenet for what it is for. Same thing for that mesh I wrote about above. Folkert van Heusden -- -- Phone: +31-6-41278122, PGP-key: 1F28D8AE, www.vanheusden.com ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 21:08:19 +0100, folkert wrote: > > > What about that the freenet daemon periodically > > > (configurable/disable-ble of course) announces itself on the lan > > > (s) to which it is connected? That way freenet-nodes can > > > interconnect and speed up distribution of data. > > > > Data distribution on Freenet doesn't work like that. Data segments > > are actually spread all across Freenet, ideally with no particular > > peer having a large portion of a large splitfile. I don't think > > having fast random LAN connections would speed things up -- the > > bottleneck will still be the LAN's connection to the Internet. (Not > > to mention the fact that it would be at least somewhat less secure. > > (Better chance of traffic analysis and such tricks against you.)) > > True, but it can be used to find a way to other nodes further down the > path. This way one doesn't need to connect to the central seednodes to > find ways to reach the global network/the rest of the freenet network. Ah, for initial connection to Freenet that might be useful, although I don't think it'll be used too often. (I have trouble finding Freenet friends in my entire city -- let alone in my LAN :p.) You can add known (and trustworthy) lan members to your list of darknet-friends, and connect that way to Freenet without using any seednodes. Or you can modify your seednodes.fref file by only including references to your LAN nodes. It's also not a good idea to be able to broadcast to anyone that you're using Freenet. (To prevent them from blacklisting you, et cetera.) (The whole point of Darknet mode was to make this impossible.) ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
> > What about that the freenet daemon periodically > > (configurable/disable-ble of course) announces itself on the lan(s) to > > which it is connected? That way freenet-nodes can interconnect and > > speed up distribution of data. > > Data distribution on Freenet doesn't work like that. Data segments are > actually spread all across Freenet, ideally with no particular peer > having a large portion of a large splitfile. I don't think having fast > random LAN connections would speed things up -- the bottleneck will > still be the LAN's connection to the Internet. (Not to mention the fact > that it would be at least somewhat less secure. (Better chance of > traffic analysis and such tricks against you.)) True, but it can be used to find a way to other nodes further down the path. This way one doesn't need to connect to the central seednodes to find ways to reach the global network/the rest of the freenet network. Folkert van Heusden -- -- Phone: +31-6-41278122, PGP-key: 1F28D8AE, www.vanheusden.com ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
On Fri, 18 Feb 2011 19:01:10 +0100, folkert wrote: > What about that the freenet daemon periodically > (configurable/disable-ble of course) announces itself on the lan(s) to > which it is connected? That way freenet-nodes can interconnect and > speed up distribution of data. Data distribution on Freenet doesn't work like that. Data segments are actually spread all across Freenet, ideally with no particular peer having a large portion of a large splitfile. I don't think having fast random LAN connections would speed things up -- the bottleneck will still be the LAN's connection to the Internet. (Not to mention the fact that it would be at least somewhat less secure. (Better chance of traffic analysis and such tricks against you.)) ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea
Hi, what he maybe means is called Local Peer Discovery [1] and many peer-to-peer software (like Azureus, Transmission) have this to discover peers running on the local network. This makes sure that the peers are not connecting over the public IP/interface (ppp0) but instead on the private IP/interface (e.g. eth0). E.g. in a NAT-ed environment with port forwards, a local host NATed by the router cannot connect back to itself or any other (except services on the router) peers over the public IP number. But of course, if no firewall rule forbids this the host can connect to other "locally" running hosts on the private IP number. Regards, Roland [1]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Local_Peer_Discovery signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
[freenet-support] idea
What about that the freenet daemon periodically (configurable/disable-ble of course) announces itself on the lan(s) to which it is connected? That way freenet-nodes can interconnect and speed up distribution of data. Maybe even via http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service_Location_Protocol so that one doesn't need to re-invent the protocol-type wheel. Of course detected nodes should then be assumed to be not very trustfull. Folkert van Heusden -- -- Phone: +31-6-41278122, PGP-key: 1F28D8AE, www.vanheusden.com ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
[freenet-support] Idea/algorithm : Fair use media file transformer
Idea/algorithm : Fair use media file transformer A potential way to transform media files for legal sharing via fair use. Consider a desired media file (for example a song), as an array A[1..N] of numbers. Consider a New work B [1..k*N] of numbers. Initialize B to a completely new (or random) set of numbers. Next, For x = 1to N set B[k*x] = A[x]. (if you prefer, you can transform it by a reversible function - such as adding or multiplying by constants). This creates a NEW WORK B[1..kN]. This work will sound completely different from work A, it is a new work, any contents that WERE of A have been transformed markedly, and would not be recognized by a reasonable person as being the same. New Work B could be separately copyrighted, or given to the public domain. New work B could - it would seem - be distributed freely by its creator (or others - if authorized or if in public domain). Now granted, someone who receives New Work B - MIGHT - in the privacy of their home - offline - RETRANSFORM New Work B for personal use. That transformation MIGHT include extracting every Nth number from B[] and saving it into an array C[] (or A'[], or it could involve any of a WIDE variety of transformations that satisfy the user in the privacy of her own home. For example : For x=1..N set A'[x]=B[x*k] (or any other transformation the recipient likes). It *IS* possible that some transformations might result in a file which might potentially infringe on a pre-existing copyright, and if this is illegal it should NOT be done. Of course one might argue that this is personal transformation of a work and fair for private use, and potentially protected by privacy but I don't know the legal nature of this. (Naturally, if it is illegal in a given jurisdiction it should NOT be done). It seems to me that this NEW WORK creation and transmission approach should be protected by copyright law itself. If you create a new work and copyright it, and/or if you give it to the public domain, you presumably have the RIGHT to allow others to copy and share it as you wish. Now it may be true that any work of a given length N can be transformed into any OTHER work of a given length N, but clearly it would be absurd to say that there is only ONE possible legally protected work of length N and noone can create another such work. (Similarly, a work A[1..N] could be transformed into j works of length N/j (or longer). Each of these new works could be unique -containing many different numbers -although containing N/j of the work A (possibly transformed) interspersed infrequently among it). Nevertheless each work would be CLEARLY new, and would NOT sound at all similar to any reasonable person when played. I hope that you found this theoretical idea / hypothetical algorithm to be of interest. Thank you for your time. - Gerhard ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
Re: [freenet-support] idea for wininstaller
I tryed windinstaller but it gave me a warning that with explorer its dangerous so I uninstall. THank You - Original Message - From: "Mathew Ryden" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 5:07 PM Subject: Re: [freenet-support] idea for wininstaller > - Original Message - > From: "Vitenka - Zen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > Damn - forgot my other suggestion. > > > > Why not register fcp:// or similar, so that we can give links into freeweb > from external websites > > without having to rely upon guessing the client port the user has chosen? > > How would fcp help in this at all? > > > Forgive me if that's alreasy been done somewhere. > > -Mathew > > > ___ > support mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Re: [freenet-support] idea for wininstaller
- Original Message - From: "Vitenka - Zen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Damn - forgot my other suggestion. > > Why not register fcp:// or similar, so that we can give links into freeweb from external websites > without having to rely upon guessing the client port the user has chosen? How would fcp help in this at all? > Forgive me if that's alreasy been done somewhere. -Mathew ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Re: [freenet-support] idea for wininstaller
Damn - forgot my other suggestion. Why not register fcp:// or similar, so that we can give links into freeweb from external websites without having to rely upon guessing the client port the user has chosen? Forgive me if that's alreasy been done somewhere. ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Re: [freenet-support] idea for wininstaller
>> Also a text tip "freenet is loading, please wait..." would prevent >> ultra-newbies to immediately try and click on it. > >These are good suggestions. But the problem is that the freenet.log >never actually says WHEN the node is ready. It says "Starting >interfaces" but even then the interfaces aren't actually startED. >They're just startING. The node would have to say "All interfaces >are now started. Node is ready." or something similar in order for >this to be really useful. And I'm not even sure that's possible >(you'd have to ask someone who speaks Java). > >In my experience, I'll often get "connection refused" on port >for several seconds after "Starting interfaces" appears in the log. >It can be very frustrating. you have already spoken out the solution: make bunnyapp try to open connections to : for every second or 500 ms, and if the connection could be established, drop it and do not ping anymore, because you know the interface is up and running (or keep on pinging to check if fproxy is still alive). if the connection failed, then the interface is not ready right now, so ping your way along until it does. The information transmitted is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential and/or privileged material. Any review, retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Re: [freenet-support] idea for wininstaller
>> but the tray utility appears almost instantly, it would be neat not to >> display the red rabbit while the node is loading but the red rabbit >> with the grean arrow on it. >> >> Also a text tip "freenet is loading, please wait..." would prevent >> ultra-newbies to immediately try and click on it. > > These are good suggestions. But the problem is that the freenet.log > never actually says WHEN the node is ready. It says "Starting > interfaces" but even then the interfaces aren't actually startED. > They're just startING. The node would have to say "All interfaces are > now started. Node is ready." or something similar in order for this to > be really useful. And I'm not even sure that's possible > (you'd have to ask someone who speaks Java). It's possible, because the rabbit icon doesn't actually read freenet.log anyway. It could try talking to the node and change icon when it's clear that freenet or the web interface are up and running. I'll work on this as soon as I can because it's a really good idea (one I had myself about a year ago but never got round to implementing!) d ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Re: [freenet-support] idea for wininstaller
Zlatin Balevsky ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > since Fred still takes up to 20 or 30 seconds to load on slower machine, You have some really WEIRD notions of what constitutes a "slower machine". If your node only takes 20 seconds to start up, you've got a pretty fast machine, or a very small data store. > but the tray utility appears almost instantly, it would be neat not to > display the red rabbit while the node is loading but the red rabbit with > the grean arrow on it. > > Also a text tip "freenet is loading, please wait..." would prevent > ultra-newbies to immediately try and click on it. These are good suggestions. But the problem is that the freenet.log never actually says WHEN the node is ready. It says "Starting interfaces" but even then the interfaces aren't actually startED. They're just startING. The node would have to say "All interfaces are now started. Node is ready." or something similar in order for this to be really useful. And I'm not even sure that's possible (you'd have to ask someone who speaks Java). In my experience, I'll often get "connection refused" on port for several seconds after "Starting interfaces" appears in the log. It can be very frustrating. -- Greg Wooledge | "Truth belongs to everybody." [EMAIL PROTECTED] |- The Red Hot Chili Peppers http://wooledge.org/~greg/ | msg01881/pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
[freenet-support] idea for wininstaller
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 since Fred still takes up to 20 or 30 seconds to load on slower machine, but the tray utility appears almost instantly, it would be neat not to display the red rabbit while the node is loading but the red rabbit with the grean arrow on it. Also a text tip "freenet is loading, please wait..." would prevent ultra-newbies to immediately try and click on it. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE9wfRhtv7fB/jjYokRAs3JAKCYZr/xIW2rds1TOFnqfwPmMosnkQCgknsf F2W9+r+T2do7rZQ+3SX11AY= =QuWX -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ support mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
