non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20011222/f08bf4ec/attachment.pgp>
> > A good place to start should be (Freenet.client.)AutoRequester.doGet(...)
> > since the AutoRequester is used by fproxy.
>
> AutoRequester is a good place to start if you want to figure out how
> the metadata implementation works, but doGet() is very much not a place
> where anything explicit
> One final word of advice: A UDP based bearer transport will suck.
> It will be hard to implement robustly (congestion control, etc),
> it will have lower performance (probably much lower) than TCP,
> and I would only use this for dual NAT situations.
Everyone probably knows this already but the
I know that this is a big 'ol can of worms, but I'm venturing here anyway.
As a client writer, I'm looking to integrate the information in GJ's
NodeStatus servlet into my client. However, I noticed that things keep
changing from build to build, and the logic in my program needed to
interpret all t
On Friday 21 December 2001 07:03 am, David McNab wrote:
> Anyone who works with any of the fcptools code, could you please back
> up your source trees in the next day or three.
Thanks for the warning. I'm ready...
--
Jay Oliveri "In the land of the blind,
System
Are wrote:
>
> Everyone probably knows this already but the Digital Fountain Tornado
> Codes transport uses UDP with very high troughput. This would probably be
> a good thing to use sometime, but I guess that is something for a freenet
> 2.0..
>
This is probably beating a dead horse, but the Di
On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 07:12:27PM -0600, Ed Onken wrote:
> At 07:59 PM 12/21/2001 -0500, Scott Young wrote:
<>
> A good place to start should be (Freenet.client.)AutoRequester.doGet(...)
> since the AutoRequester is used by fproxy.
AutoRequester is a good place to start if you want to figure ou
>From Mark J Roberts
>goran at kirra.net:
>> What if we just:
>> * put the relaying node alone in seedNodes file
>> * make sure we connect to that and keep that connection persistant.
>> that is implement a persistancy option in conf or protocol
>And that, I'm afraid, can't be accomplished with
Benjamin Coates:
> Is there anything wrong with non-nat Freenet nodes allowing connection relay
> by default?
I guess that'd be fine, assuming we're on the same page regarding
the meaning of connection relay.
Have you considered how brutally this would fuck our connection
latency, though? (Recap
Hi freenetters,
I feel the need to give advance notice.
Anyone who works with any of the fcptools code, could you please back
up your source trees in the next day or three.
Because the cunt writing this email has some nasty intentions of
committing an older version of all the sources, in a state
10 matches
Mail list logo
