On Thu, 18 May 2000, you wrote: # 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
Actually, this was done. :) http://www.detached.net/mailtunnel/desc.html "Mailtunnel creates a bidirectional virtual data path tunneled in e-mail messages" Goes to show.. _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
