On Mon, Jul 22, 2002 at 09:05:38PM -0400, Michael Wiktowy wrote: > Greetings, > > I was just wondering if Ian and others feel that multi-area > specialization is a requirement for Freenet to work (i.e. stems > from a conscious design decision) or just something that is a > consequence of the current Freenet implementation.
No, I don't think its necessary except in very small networks (which of course
might characterize the current network).
>
> It seems to me that Freenet could be designed to work either
> way and having one dynamic keyspace specialization might
> simplify routing quite a bit; maybe even enough to make it
> more reliable while retaining its anonymity.
Theres nothing that should prevent this currently, in fact, my node
has two distinct peaks.
> There is also a line to be drawn between first party
> specialization (what the node itself tries to specialize in via
> selective caching) and third party specialization (what other
> nodes think another node's specialty is and attempting to
> reinforce that via more requests and inserts to that node).
Separating these is very very bad. If the network thinks your good
for something and you think its something else, the node will constantly
be fighting the network.
Scott
msg03472/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
