On Monday 21 May 2007 23:27, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > On 5/22/07, Matthew Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What you propose is a workaround for the fact that the current load > > balancing sucks, which would only be of value to nodes which have > > exceptionally fast internet connections. It is therefore not of any > > importance IMHO. > > That was the whole point, to allow those with faster connections to be > able to use them. Eg the 1Mb connection I could use to setup a fast > link in agreement with another peer. But nexgens tell's me this wont > help because of the way the code works. I admit I am biased because my > propagation seems woefully slow as I dont have any darknet links (only > freenet links) yet. I wanted to compensate for this by setting up > faster links with someone on the darknet to assist in propagating data > but I am told it wont help. Its frustrating though when you have > 10Mbit down, 1Mbit up and you are transmitting into freenet at 10K/s.
Well do we really want nodes to be sending 99% of their traffic to a single ubernode? That doesn't seem healthy to me. Potential attacks.
pgpFXpqd0eH1H.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
