Joseph Solbrig <jsolbrig at webcom.com> wrote: > >Nah, not much good. > >What do you do if you want to put an application on top of freenet ? > >like for example usenet over freenet ? The "application" part should > >certainly be kept unused for now for such future usages. > > An application - those things that talk to freenetlib - should sit on top > of the freenet protocol. Freenet should not be telling applications what > the application's data is, the applications should just figure it out. You > can encode virtually any protocol treating freenet as just a > data-dictionary (a set of key-data pairs).
No, no, for purposes of the ISO model, the application layer refers to the level of abstraction where the network is a complete black box -- put bytes in and bytes come out at the appropriate destination by magic. Email, web, telnet, whatever. It has nothing to do with putting anything in any headers. It's just terminology. Of course you can put applications on top of other applications, e.g. GNU Chess over email. Or even network layers on top of the application layer, e.g. mailtunnel (TCP over email) - I'm sure you can see the infinite recursion coming. =) (One shudders to think of the latency of email over TCP over email.) theo _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
