e announcement protocol must also be changed so that
nodes can not choose their own specializations.
--
Thomas Leske
___
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
after they have learned about other nodes.
--
Thomas Leske
___
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
about it in my next mail.
--
Thomas Leske
___
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
other place in the keyspace), because it will break the
bookmarks of his readers.If there is a well-known index of new freesites, then
the attacker will read it too and try to censor the new site as well.
--
Thomas Leske
___
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROT
specialized around the key to be censored are taken
down, it will be pure chance to find the data unless it was already very
popular before.
--
Thomas Leske
___
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
andom keys. For the keys outside its specialization
he will receive query rejects and for the ones inside its specialization DNFs.
--
Thomas Leske
___
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
Tom Kaitchuck wrote:
The problem with this is that it doesn't really work. For the sake of
argument, lets say that the time it takes your node to return some data is T,
and the time it would take it to get it from the next node is T + 100.
Right now if we return is less than T+100, they can tell
Toad wrote:
On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 06:10:58PM +0100, Thomas Leske wrote:
You can build boards that can not be flooded with the existing key types.
There
is a board/list owner that decides who is able to post. Similar to earlier
proposals
new identities can be obtained for hash cash or think
Tom Kaitchuck wrote:
None the less people could flood boards now, it's just that the software stops
requesting keys if they don't seem to be there or get tagged as spam or
blocked by the user. We could just do the same thing. Then worst case
scenario, we have what we have now.
You can build boar
Ian Clarke wrote:
It certainly seems to have a very nice UI, but the most important
question is how does it find data efficiently and in a scalable manner
while preserving anonymity - and for the life of me I can't find an
answer to that question anywhere on their site.
From what I have found on
Dan Merillat wrote:
But you can not answer an insert with a DNF. The insert would waste
bandwidth.
No, but you can answer an insert with a collision. If you don't get a
collision, follow up the insert.
But if there is a collision, then the node will have to deliver the data.
With insert requests
a source (e.g. in an insert).
1. data item<- data for that the node did spontaneously reset the data source to
itself
.
20. data item <- propagated data reply (privileged)
.
30. data item <- other data
.
.
80. data item <- propagated data reply (unprivileged)
.
ay it becomes harder to make a number of nodes drop the same data.
--
Thomas Leske
___
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
ore than
pcaching did. IIRC pcaching was introduced after it was successful in
this regard in simulations.
--
Thomas Leske
___
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
al postpones the decision. The node always caches the
data and propagates new requests for the data as unimportant.
The response tells it, if caching was a good decision. If not,
the node behaves as if it had not cached the data.
--
Thomas Leske
___
Devl
cause a collision, though.
--
Thomas Leske
___
Devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
fish wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 06, 2003 at 07:57:02PM +0200, Thomas Leske wrote:
> > One could also solve the two problems without containers:
> > 1) completeness:
> > Make FEC work for sets of small files. The regular files are
> > just inserted normally. The zip arch
Menno Jonkers wrote:
> But that may take a while. In the mean time a pragmatic, low impact way
> to improve speed and completeness of site retrieval could greatly
> improve Freenet's usability. Waiting is annoying; waiting for something
> that doesn't show up in the end even more.
One could also so
-list onto freenet some day, then
I would
have to poll hundrets of outboxes instead of just one inbox.
Would there be different outboxes for different receivers, or would I
have to
fetch all the mails from every person?
--
Thomas Leske
___
devl ma
-April/005054.html
--
Thomas Leske
___
devl mailing list
devl at freenetproject.org
http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
:
First the node calculates the AmountOfHashCash (see above). Then the
hash of
the slot number,
the encrypted content and
the hash cash
modulo AmountOfHashCash must be zero.
--
Thomas Leske
___
devl mailing list
devl at freenetproject.org
http
that with TRKs.
>>2. Minimal request length (requests that must go the full HTL are
>>undeseriable)
>
> agreed, at least for browsing, and provisionally agreed for FNP traffic
> internally.
You can let each reader decide, if he accepts a possibly old version in
exchange for l
ts that must go the full HTL are
undeseriable)
agreed, at least for browsing, and provisionally agreed for FNP traffic
internally.
You can let each reader decide, if he accepts a possibly old version in
exchange for lower latency.
- Thomas Leske
___
Andrew Rodland wrote:
> On Friday 29 November 2002 05:00 am, Thomas Leske wrote:
>
>>Scott Young wrote:
>>
>>>Actually, I just got another idea on how to handle them with a new key
>>>type. Let's call it a Time Redirection Key (TRK). The key is des
Andrew Rodland wrote:
> On Friday 29 November 2002 05:00 am, Thomas Leske wrote:
>
>>Scott Young wrote:
>>
>>>Actually, I just got another idea on how to handle them with a new key
>>>type. Let's call it a Time Redirection Key (TRK). The key is design
w content by then, the nodes get the most recent version
> with the same time cost as a DBR. If it isn't updated, well then it takes
> longer, but you'd still get the last published version.
>
> any thoughts?
>
> -Scott Young
-Thomas Leske
st as a DBR. If it isn't updated, well then it takes
longer, but you'd still get the last published version.
any thoughts?
-Scott Young
-Thomas Leske
___
devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
makes sence in some cases, but the error message should tell you,
at what point in the redirections the error occured.
(I 'm using build 618.)
--
Thomas Leske
___
devl mailing list
devl at freenetproject.org
http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cg
makes sence in some cases, but the error message should tell you,
at what point in the redirections the error occured.
(I 'm using build 618.)
--
Thomas Leske
___
devl mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/ma
On Mon, 2 Jul 2001 15:35:22 -0400, Tavin Cole wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 02, 2001 at 02:14:29PM -0500, Mathew Ryden wrote:
> > - Original Message -
> > From: "Thomas Leske" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > > Hello,
> > >
> >
Hello,
I wonder, why the bandwidth limit is implemented the way it is.
I put up a node for that I can spend 2 GB traffic a month. So I set the
bandwidth limit in .freenetrc to 800 byte/second and then realized, how
slow my node became.
My solution was to save the currently unused bandwidth for
31 matches
Mail list logo
