To get back to the original question (quoted below), that is, how to make Freenet useful as a mirror for non-anonymous content, I would suggest a completely different approach.
Let each content provider (on their mirrors page) give instructions for retrieving the data from Freenet (i.e. clickable chk's for each file which work if you have a Freenet node at localhost, together with instructions on how to obtain Freenet. Perhaps they would like to distribute Freenet themselves, with a different set of default bookmarks...). Also let them provide a one-click link to insert the data back into Freenet. And let them put up a request that people who successfully get the data from the master site or from another mirror should insert it into Freenet using the one-click link. For instance, if Red Hat were to do this when a new set of CDROM's is released, then for the next few weeks, the CDROM's would be easy to fetch from Freenet because lots of independent nodes would have inserted them. I would expect that this doesn't cause an inordinate load on Freenet. If the CHK is found, does it even upload the file from the inserting node? -- Ed Huff On Sat, 2003-09-13 at 08:59, pineapple wrote: > I was wondering if there were any plans to have the > option in Freenet for users to make their node read > only. That is, content can only be inserted localy > and not by requests. Some content providers may want > to make their material available permanently (or at > least as long as they desire) to freenet users, but do > not want to provide resources to Freenet (other than > the content they provide of course) for some reason. > Some examples of such users would be religious, > government (on all levels), media organizations, the > entertainment industry and other special interest > groups. These users would not find Freenet's > anonymity much benefit (and full participation in > caching content could be a liability), while Freenet's > other qualities would be very attractive. I mention > this because I have recently noticed that BitTorrent > is showing up on more and more mirror lists for > downloads. My own personal bias would be to see > Freenet replace BitTorrent in this capacity. > > -- > Edward J. Huff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
