On Fri, Feb 21, 2003 at 06:10:57PM -0800, Josh Steiner wrote: > i concur strongely, a very large part of the freenet userbase is going > to be semi technical users who are using high bandwidth connections like > dsl, and hence are natted. probably not a good idea to cut this > population out of the freenet node pool.
They are already effectively cut out. If they can't configure dyndns, they probably can't configure a port forward either. > > -josh > > Mark J Roberts wrote: > > >Matthew Toseland: > > > > > >>It would help in a few corner cases... but you'd still need to set up a > >>port forward, so it doesn't seem worthwhile for that. And "next release" > >>means 0.5.2, right? > >> > >> > > > >But even clients need to configure port forwarding in order to > >reliably receive replies. > > > >We should _not_ make a large number of users--those with NATed > >nodes on DSL/cable connections--have to configure complicated DNS > >services. Because they probably won't do it right, if they do it at > >all. > > > >This is an important bugfix. If anything should be added to 0.5.1, > >this is it. There's no point I can see in delaying. > > > >_______________________________________________ > >devl mailing list > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl > > > > > > > -- > ____________________________________________________ > independent u.s. drum'n'bass -- http://vitriolix.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > devl mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl > -- Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED]/[EMAIL PROTECTED] Full time freenet hacker. http://freenetproject.org/ Freenet Distribution Node (temporary) at http://80-192-4-23.cable.ubr09.na.blueyonder.co.uk:8889/SPmjEh6sH3Y/ ICTHUS.
pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
