> --- Gordan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote > > http://entropy.stop1984.com/en/p2p.html > > The question is in the routing. > > But if they use compatible FNP, then the routing > shouldn't matter. If you asume the protocol and the routing are the same thing. My point of view was that nodes are free to route how they want and still fufill the protocol, as long as they find data posted.
> I was thinking about it by looking at Freenet and > Entropy as different > implementations of the same general protocol. > Compatible FNP is in that case > the fundamental building block, and everythins else > can be variable, e.g. the > data store format, routing implementation, etc. The > advantage is that Freenet > and Entropy nodes would be treated equally, and > there wouldn't be two > different networks to bridge at all, just one bigger > network, with what is > effectively two different node implementations. Hmmm, so what you are proposing is that if someone wants to implement the exact same routing freenet has, then they can mix thier nodes with freenet's. 1) What's the point of this? It doesn't allow us to compare systems and learn from each other. 2) They can do this anyway with out us even knowing. 3) I'm sure CrazyNet(or whatever) has no problem mingling with freenet nodes if we implement the exact same routing as CrazyNet. You seem to be assuming that freenet's routing is perfect, and everyone else will gladly jump ship and adopt it. What I was proposing was since the DHT is such a universal problem, maybe different competing (friendly) systems could share the same universe of data, and we could learn from each other. Say someone comes up with NNG routing for freenet, which extends FNP. It'd be cool if we could run a small subnetwork of NNG nodes to see how well they work. This would give you a better idea of NNG's peformance, than tring out one NNG node in a sea of old nodes. Can we make a hetrogeneous network? Is it worth it? Does anyone else have any ideas? > This would be roughly equivalent to some people > using Lime Wire and other > people using Bear Share, but both programs are just > different Gnutella > protocol nodes. The network, effectively, doesn't > care about how the > implementation works, as long as it obeys the > protocol specification. Right and that works because the routing is done the same. It sucks equally, no matter what you use. __________________________________________________________________ Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - http://mail.yahoo.de Logos und Klingelt�ne f�rs Handy bei http://sms.yahoo.de _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
