-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Toad wrote: | We will have to keep the conventional bandwidth limiting anyway for | those who need to throttle their downlink. [...]
How big is the actual need to throttle the downlink? Wouldn't this be typically throttled as a side-effect of uplink limits?
Freenet's downstream needs are usually smaller than its upstream needs (the ratio is 1:4 for my node, 25Gb store) and most internet connections have capacity the other way around. I can imagine a downstream bottleneck in case of heavy downloading, especially on a transient node. But unless you're running a public gateway, this would be caused by the actions of user himself, so let him have it.
Guess my point is: if it's a burden to keep this piece of code running, better be sure that you're making someone happy with it :-)
Cheers,
Menno -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQE/M8bV9m/IbJq4o8sRAmbnAKDMdWiD2I3anBxYGDiro9lvc7M40wCfZhCz hoAUNnfIp9pPl4eLwFgL2O4= =r/dE -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________ devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
