I see a flaw in Freenet. Since I'm a newbie/lurker/dilettante, I know (am pretty sure) that my opinion is wrong. However, since this isn't addressed in the literature I read, maybe someone could explain to me why I'm wrong. In Freenet, nodes can be 'near' or 'far', depending on how many hops you need to get there. Near and far also change based on popularity and key-affinity. However, getting data from a Freenet-near node might use more network resources than a Freenet-far node, because of the way the physical network is set up. Since the configuration w/r/t reality is random, and there are many more bad routing configurations than good, I'd imagine that bad routing overwhelms the network, eg even though you find a document in a handful of hops, the data is in taiwan while you're in ohio. This can't be a new idea. Are you guys tweaking Freenet to handle this very problem? Is there something special about the way the Internet is set up that avoids this problem? Maybe there are more good routes than bad. _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl
