On Sunday 02 March 2008 15:25, bbackde at googlemail.com wrote: > 2008/3/2 Julien Cornuwel <batosai at batosai.net>: > > bbackde at googlemail.com a ?crit : > > > > >> > 2) [BIG issue] If messages store is on a Freenet node and not in Frost > > >> > folder, a node cannot be shared by two or more people. > > >> > I know that people _do_ share freenet nodes. > > >> > For example, Tin0 from Germany offers access to his Freenet node on > > >> > http://i2p.to/ and people run Frost agains it > > >> > without running own node. While not a good idea from privacy point of > > >> > view and risky for operator because of Vorratsdatenspeicherung & co, > > >> > sharing a node is a way to get more newbies onboard. > > >> > > >> Maybe it's possible to tag messages for a client ID, as we do with > > >> private download queues. > > > > > > But this would require the node to fetch and store messages for ALL existing > > > boards and identities. Just for the case that someone maybe wants to see it. > > > This is a big change from the current situation (frost and fms), where > > > you can choose > > > to ignore boards and identities and we do not have to request the > > > boards/identities at all. > > > > No, the node would just fetch messages requested by one of its clients. > > And it would show each client only the messages it requested. > > This becomes complicated: what messages to fetch depends on the WoT > trust level of each client. > If WoT is independent, how would the underlying system know what to > fetch, but not fetch > messages from spam identities?
Well, at worst, we'd have a completely separate database and data structures for each client. Of course this means that running a public node with FCP support and the WoT plugin wouldn't work - but really, why would anyone install Frost but then connect it to a public node? It's madness. I can understand people trying out FProxy via a public node... but Frost?! If this is vital then a public node would have to require round-trip email verification for creating an account or something, but that's really not our problem. > > Another point brought up by a Frost user: his node runs on a slow old > PC (I also know people > who run the node on silent PCs), and his system is utilized. He cannot > run another CPU/memory > eating plugininside the node, he wants to run fms from another box, > using FCP2 to request > keys only. Long term it should be possible to run most plugins outside the node if absolutely necessary. For example, this particular plugin would generally only need to do requests and inserts, which could certainly be done from a plugin container running on another computer and talking to the node over FCP. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20080303/69b6de25/attachment.pgp>
