-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 27 Jun 2006, at 12:24, Matthew Toseland wrote:
Do we want semi-opennet support? This would be a way to connect, with
mutual advance consent, to peers of our direct peers? (There would be
measures taken to ensure that we don't connect to peers of their
direct
peers).
Why not implement proper opennet? Your stated objection was
previously based on something Oskar apparently said, or didn't say,
but he now seems to think we should do it (in fact, I think this was
always his opinion).
I agree that we need to simulate it to ensure that destination
sampling (aka LRU) can co-exist with location swapping, but that
should be a relatively straight-forward simulation, Oskar may even do
it for us :-)
Ian.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (Darwin)
iD8DBQFEoaq3QtgxRWSmsqwRAntBAJ9cKy0YcJO9bzJTetPvXXN5154VNwCfVewD
SzkIU8z4EK7kRecX7SOKZ0c=
=384/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
[email protected]
http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
