On Monday 04 August 2003 11:11 pm, Tracy R Reed wrote: > What reasonable ideas have been rejected?
Follow this thread. http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/pipermail/devl/2003-August/007823.html (There was also another thread in the same vain that I started. But I like this proposal better.) And this one. http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/pipermail/devl/2003-July/007589.html To a lesser extent this one. It's old. http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/pipermail/devl/2003-July/006963.html I proposed this: http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/pipermail/devl/2003-July/007675.html and I posted this just today: http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/pipermail/tech/2003-August/000472.html I've proposed that last one two previous times. For those last two items I have not gotten any responces. Please someone tell me you have at least read them! Also recently there was something about the path shortening code, but I couldn't find it. > recently that I object to would not be needed if freenet worked properly > and are only a distraction from getting it working properly. NGR is a big > step in the direction of getting it working properly. It has been shown > that freenet performance is all about routing. Without effective routing > we are just another non-scalable broadcast search network that doesn't > find data. > > If NGR doesn't work I think something serious is going to have to be > proposed to enforce routing and strong specialization. Yes. But it won't improve the length of the routing paths, just the speed. Something serious should be done to enforce strong specialization. _______________________________________________ devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
