> > > I haven't seen _any_ compelling argument why above-average nodes > > > should attract more than their "fair share" of requests. What's > > > yours? > > > > Over time, the large node simply accumulates more data from Freenet. > > This means there should be more nodes which point to data on the large > > node. Thus, there will be more requests routed to the large node. > > Does FreeNet not take into account reliability,
Not for routing an individual request, no. However, nodes that don't respond when requested will be flushed from the datastore. >proximity, No. >speed, No. > etc of > nodes when fetching files? If it does I would think it could automaticlly > sense if a node was becoming saturated and find a more satisfactory link > and/or clone the resource? > > Why is it a bad thing if machines with more resources do more work? Centralization. While it's not so bad if a better machine does a little more work, it get's bad when that same machine is getting requests from half the network. _______________________________________________ Chat mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
