> The data source node may answer with the query > reject message, After having already incurred processing and latency costs - i.e. too late to do anyone any good.
> And existing weak points in freenet are not an argument to open up even > more. Indeed. However, this does not create a new weak point. Your suggestion does. Hit-count information can be dropped the very instant the recipient decides they don't have time to deal with it, and can at the very worst create an inaccurate picture of document popularity. This absolutely pales in comparison to the problems that might arise if a node started spewing redirects (to either legitimate or non-existent addresses) in response to every request they saw. > You misunderstood me. The node receiving a redirect may choose not to > follow it. > It can always request the data again and specify, that it won't accept a > redirect. Two round trips instead of one. Great idea. IIRC, the goal here was to increase the persistence of popular objects by making popularity information more accurate. The Principle of Least Fucking Around says that changing Freenet's entire caching/routing strategy and introducing myriad new possibilities of error or attack is not the way to go about it. _______________________________________________ freenet-tech mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/tech
