On 14 Oct 2005, at 18:45, Matthew Toseland wrote: > It's a question of WHAT could we usefully share. We certainly don't > want > to build Freenet 0.7 on top of I2P as it is, whole. Because I2P > requires > a harvestable DHT. Now, perhaps we could do something with restricted > routes; I don't know, I need a little more information to make that > assessmnet. Also, I don't agree with the general assumption that the > best way to do distributed content is to run a classic DHT on top of > I2P, with nodes anonymized. That is one option, it has certain > advantages, but there are others, with other advantages i.e. freenet.
Yeah, what is interesting about this is that, even if it were possible to migrate to I2P while getting around the harvestability problem, JRandom has never made an affirmative case for why it is desirable, I mean, we have a pretty nifty messaging layer in 0.7, perhaps I2P might be better off migrating to that. > Perhaps we should meet up on IRC? I'm free for the next few hours... I don't see any benefit to that, I think the issues are pretty clear based on this mailing list thread - I don't see much point in aggravating my RSI by rehashing the whole thing on IRC. Ian.
