On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 08:01:39PM +, Simon Porter wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-01-27 at 18:52, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 06:50:44PM -0800, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > > > What QOS does the internet have in general? We need simply to have
> > > > enough local bandwidth, enough of a
On Mon, 2003-01-27 at 18:52, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 06:50:44PM -0800, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > > What QOS does the internet have in general? We need simply to have
> > > enough local bandwidth, enough of a buffer, enough parallel requests and
> > > enough redundancy.
> >
>
On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 06:50:44PM -0800, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > What QOS does the internet have in general? We need simply to have
> > enough local bandwidth, enough of a buffer, enough parallel requests and
> > enough redundancy.
>
> Assuming this isn't a rhetorical question - the only guarantee
On Mon, Jan 27, 2003 at 08:01:39PM +, Simon Porter wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-01-27 at 18:52, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> > On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 06:50:44PM -0800, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > > > What QOS does the internet have in general? We need simply to have
> > > > enough local bandwidth, enough of a
On Mon, 2003-01-27 at 18:52, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 06:50:44PM -0800, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > > What QOS does the internet have in general? We need simply to have
> > > enough local bandwidth, enough of a buffer, enough parallel requests and
> > > enough redundancy.
> >
>
On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 06:50:44PM -0800, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > What QOS does the internet have in general? We need simply to have
> > enough local bandwidth, enough of a buffer, enough parallel requests and
> > enough redundancy.
>
> Assuming this isn't a rhetorical question - the only guarantee
On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 09:59:23PM +1100, fish wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 11:49:46AM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> > On Friday 24 January 2003 22:11, you wrote:
> > > What is the situation with the streaming servlet?
> > >
> > > Ian.
> >
> > 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have e
On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 09:55:22PM +1100, fish wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 11:49:46AM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
>
> > 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
> > undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is.
>
> [exaggeration]
> You could say the sam
On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 01:00:01PM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> On Saturday 25 January 2003 22:49, you wrote:
> > > length 7.4M
> > > elapsed time: 37 minutes
> > > end to end transfer rate: 7.4M * (1024K/M) / (37 min * (60sec/min) ) ~=
> > >3.4k/sec
> > >
> > > It took one minute to find
On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 09:57:28PM +1100, fish wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 08:15:26PM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> > > Why not encourage people to do things which have a reason
> > > Personally I am optimistic, with
> > > Splitfiles I have been seeing overall download rates of around 30k/
On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 05:16:36PM -0800, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > > > You don't want fred to have to compete with code that is running
> > > > continuous FEC decoding in the same JVM. Perhaps your machine is so
> > > > powerful that you haven't noticed, but we can't get fred to run with
> > > > rea
On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 04:03:01PM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> On Sunday 26 January 2003 13:51, you wrote:
>
> > > > > Well, I thought you were worried about something running in Fred's JVM
> > > > by default.
> > >
> > > When you next talk to the press and mention Freenet as a replacement fo
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 11:49:46AM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> On Friday 24 January 2003 22:11, you wrote:
> > What is the situation with the streaming servlet?
> >
> > Ian.
>
> 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
> undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 08:15:26PM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> > Why not encourage people to do things which have a reason
> > Personally I am optimistic, with
> > Splitfiles I have been seeing overall download rates of around 30k/sec,
> > which is more than enough for a FM quality ogg stream
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 11:49:46AM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
> undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is.
[exaggeration]
You could say the same about fec generally, and I'm sure you could make a
similar argume
> What QOS does the internet have in general? We need simply to have
> enough local bandwidth, enough of a buffer, enough parallel requests and
> enough redundancy.
Assuming this isn't a rhetorical question - the only guarantee that the
Internet makes at the IP layer is that your packet will prob
> What QOS does the internet have in general? We need simply to have
> enough local bandwidth, enough of a buffer, enough parallel requests and
> enough redundancy.
Assuming this isn't a rhetorical question - the only guarantee that the
Internet makes at the IP layer is that your packet will prob
On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 09:59:23PM +1100, fish wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 11:49:46AM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> > On Friday 24 January 2003 22:11, you wrote:
> > > What is the situation with the streaming servlet?
> > >
> > > Ian.
> >
> > 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have e
On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 09:55:22PM +1100, fish wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 11:49:46AM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
>
> > 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
> > undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is.
>
> [exaggeration]
> You could say the sam
On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 01:00:01PM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> On Saturday 25 January 2003 22:49, you wrote:
> > > length 7.4M
> > > elapsed time: 37 minutes
> > > end to end transfer rate: 7.4M * (1024K/M) / (37 min * (60sec/min) ) ~=
> > >3.4k/sec
> > >
> > > It took one minute to find
On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 09:57:28PM +1100, fish wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 08:15:26PM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> > > Why not encourage people to do things which have a reason
> > > Personally I am optimistic, with
> > > Splitfiles I have been seeing overall download rates of around 30k/
On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 05:16:36PM -0800, Ian Clarke wrote:
> > > > You don't want fred to have to compete with code that is running
> > > > continuous FEC decoding in the same JVM. Perhaps your machine is so
> > > > powerful that you haven't noticed, but we can't get fred to run with
> > > > rea
On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 04:03:01PM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> On Sunday 26 January 2003 13:51, you wrote:
>
> > > > > Well, I thought you were worried about something running in Fred's JVM
> > > > by default.
> > >
> > > When you next talk to the press and mention Freenet as a replacement fo
> > > You don't want fred to have to compete with code that is running
> > > continuous FEC decoding in the same JVM. Perhaps your machine is so
> > > powerful that you haven't noticed, but we can't get fred to run with
> > > reasonable CPU usage *all by itself*.
> If you really care so passionat
> > > You don't want fred to have to compete with code that is running
> > > continuous FEC decoding in the same JVM. Perhaps your machine is so
> > > powerful that you haven't noticed, but we can't get fred to run with
> > > reasonable CPU usage *all by itself*.
> If you really care so passionat
On Sunday 26 January 2003 13:51, you wrote:
> > > > Well, I thought you were worried about something running in Fred's JVM
> > > by default.
> >
> > When you next talk to the press and mention Freenet as a replacement for
> > internet radio (which it is not), everyone will turn it on and try to ru
On Saturday 25 January 2003 22:47, you wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 08:15:26PM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> > > > 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
> > > > undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is.
> > >
> > > I agree - that is what plugin archi
On Saturday 25 January 2003 22:49, you wrote:
> > length 7.4M
> > elapsed time: 37 minutes
> > end to end transfer rate: 7.4M * (1024K/M) / (37 min * (60sec/min) ) ~=
> >3.4k/sec
> >
> > It took one minute to find the SplitFile metadata and somewhat less than
> > 2 minutes to decode.
> >
> > D
On Sunday 26 January 2003 13:51, you wrote:
> > > > Well, I thought you were worried about something running in Fred's JVM
> > > by default.
> >
> > When you next talk to the press and mention Freenet as a replacement for
> > internet radio (which it is not), everyone will turn it on and try to ru
> > Well, I thought you were worried about something running in Fred's JVM
> > by default.
> When you next talk to the press and mention Freenet as a replacement for
> internet radio (which it is not), everyone will turn it on and try to run it
> for a while until the network collapses.
More gr
> > Well, I thought you were worried about something running in Fred's JVM
> > by default.
> When you next talk to the press and mention Freenet as a replacement for
> internet radio (which it is not), everyone will turn it on and try to run it
> for a while until the network collapses.
More gr
On Saturday 25 January 2003 22:47, you wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 08:15:26PM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> > > > 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
> > > > undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is.
> > >
> > > I agree - that is what plugin archi
On Saturday 25 January 2003 22:49, you wrote:
> > length 7.4M
> > elapsed time: 37 minutes
> > end to end transfer rate: 7.4M * (1024K/M) / (37 min * (60sec/min) ) ~=
> >3.4k/sec
> >
> > It took one minute to find the SplitFile metadata and somewhat less than
> > 2 minutes to decode.
> >
> > D
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 11:49:46AM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> On Friday 24 January 2003 22:11, you wrote:
> > What is the situation with the streaming servlet?
> >
> > Ian.
>
> 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
> undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 08:15:26PM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> > Why not encourage people to do things which have a reason
> > Personally I am optimistic, with
> > Splitfiles I have been seeing overall download rates of around 30k/sec,
> > which is more than enough for a FM quality ogg stream
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 11:49:46AM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
> undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is.
[exaggeration]
You could say the same about fec generally, and I'm sure you could make a
similar argume
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 08:15:26PM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> On Saturday 25 January 2003 15:07, you wrote:
> > > 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
> > > undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is.
> >
> > I agree - that is what plugin architectures
> Personally I am optimistic, with
> Splitfiles I have been seeing overall download rates of around 30k/sec,
> which is more than enough for a FM quality ogg stream.
>
Ian:
I just inserted one of the Radio EFF Open Audio mp3's from the
eff website and then retrieved it from my node, skipping the
On Saturday 25 January 2003 15:07, you wrote:
> > 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
> > undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is.
>
> I agree - that is what plugin architectures are for.
What do you mean?
When you add a servlet to the mainport configur
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday 25 January 2003 08:15 pm, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> On Saturday 25 January 2003 15:07, you wrote:
> > > 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
> > > undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is.
> >
> >
> length 7.4M
> elapsed time: 37 minutes
> end to end transfer rate: 7.4M * (1024K/M) / (37 min * (60sec/min) ) ~=
>3.4k/sec
>
> It took one minute to find the SplitFile metadata and somewhat less than 2
> minutes to decode.
>
> Discounting that ~= 3.7k/sec raw transfer.
>
> How many t
> length 7.4M
> elapsed time: 37 minutes
> end to end transfer rate: 7.4M * (1024K/M) / (37 min * (60sec/min) ) ~=
>3.4k/sec
>
> It took one minute to find the SplitFile metadata and somewhat less than 2
> minutes to decode.
>
> Discounting that ~= 3.7k/sec raw transfer.
>
> How many t
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 08:15:26PM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> > > 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
> > > undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is.
> >
> > I agree - that is what plugin architectures are for.
> What do you mean?
>
> When you add
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 08:15:26PM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> > > 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
> > > undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is.
> >
> > I agree - that is what plugin architectures are for.
> What do you mean?
>
> When you add
> Personally I am optimistic, with
> Splitfiles I have been seeing overall download rates of around 30k/sec,
> which is more than enough for a FM quality ogg stream.
>
Ian:
I just inserted one of the Radio EFF Open Audio mp3's from the
eff website and then retrieved it from my node, skipping the
On Sat, Jan 25, 2003 at 08:15:26PM -0500, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> On Saturday 25 January 2003 15:07, you wrote:
> > > 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
> > > undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is.
> >
> > I agree - that is what plugin architectures
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Saturday 25 January 2003 08:15 pm, Gianni Johansson wrote:
> On Saturday 25 January 2003 15:07, you wrote:
> > > 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
> > > undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is.
> >
> >
On Saturday 25 January 2003 15:07, you wrote:
> > 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
> > undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is.
>
> I agree - that is what plugin architectures are for.
What do you mean?
When you add a servlet to the mainport configur
> 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
> undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is.
I agree - that is what plugin architectures are for.
> 2) How do you plan to address QOS? I have asked this question several times
> and each time it is ignored.
> If
> 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
> undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is.
I agree - that is what plugin architectures are for.
> 2) How do you plan to address QOS? I have asked this question several times
> and each time it is ignored.
> If
On Friday 24 January 2003 22:11, you wrote:
> What is the situation with the streaming servlet?
>
> Ian.
1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is.
Has anyone tried to get it running in HttpServletRunner?
I am not ag
On Friday 24 January 2003 22:11, you wrote:
> What is the situation with the streaming servlet?
>
> Ian.
1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems
undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is.
Has anyone tried to get it running in HttpServletRunner?
I am not ag
What is the situation with the streaming servlet?
Ian.
--
Ian Clarkeian@[freenetproject.org|locut.us|cematics.com]
Latest Project http://locut.us/
Personal Homepage http://locut.us/ian/
__
What is the situation with the streaming servlet?
Ian.
--
Ian Clarkeian@[freenetproject.org|locut.us|cematics.com]
Latest Project http://locut.us/
Personal Homepage http://locut.us/ian/
__
54 matches
Mail list logo
