On Mon, Sep 22, 2003 at 08:51:31PM -0400, Edward J. Huff wrote: > On Mon, 2003-09-22 at 20:18, David McNab wrote: > > On Mon, 2003-09-22 at 10:24, Bogdan Butnaru wrote: > > > I write this message because I noticed there is a clash between the > > > Amphetadesk (sourceforge.net/projects/amphetadesk/) URIs and those of > > > Freenet (www.freenetproject.org). Both seem to use URIs beginning with > > > 127.0.0.1:8888. > > [,,,] > > Don't regard this as a design fault. While many standard services have > > been settled on specific ports (eg SMTP=25, HTTP=80, HTTPS=443 etc), > > there are a great many software packages which aren't standardised, and > > cope by providing easy ways to change the listening port. > > > The "correct" way to fix this is for IANA to provide a namespace for > URI's, i.e. freenet project should be able to ask for and receive > a reseveration on "freenet://" URI's. Then there should be a > configuration option in all browsers to specify how to resolve > such URI's, i.e. freenet:// should translate to http://localhost:8888/ > if the user knows he is running FProxy on localhost:08888.
This is quite implementible with a browser plugin, without IANA involvement. However it would break our current universal browser compatibility. Which would really piss off a lot of people - ian for example. > > Then web pages could refer to freenet sites with freenet:// instead > of http://127.0.0.1:8888/ > > Don't hold your breath. > > BTW I suppose this has been debated endlessly on usenet, > and I don't know what was said. Sorry. If you are interested > in fixing this, you could research the question of how to > reserve "freenet://" and how to get the open-source browsers > to provide the necessary configuration option. > > Alternatively, I imagine that one could write javascript which > would live on the server which hosts the page referring to > a freenet URI, so that when the user clicks on the URI, the > javascript asks (once) how to access FProxy and adjusts the > reference. This is a more do-able project. It's quite feasible. It has been done in fact, occasionally. It's just that it's not regarded as a good idea. > > -- > Edward J. Huff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
