On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 05:18:59PM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote: > On Mon, Apr 30, 2001 at 07:05:43PM -0500, Brandon wrote: > > Yes, but I already have such an e-mail client, which is why I'm asking how > > this is useful. > > firstly, your email client is just one example, not everyone might wish > to use it (some might desire a think-cash based solution), and email is > just one example. Another would be a client which supported submission > to an in-freenet key index. Conventionally, such a client couldn't > terminate before it had found the end of the stack which might take > several minutes - this would be intolerable to many users and thus this > kind of solution would be essential.
Don't forget freenet-news (which i am trying to work on, but I can't really figure out how to use IndexClient yet). > > But the index API doesn't necessarily need to be non-blocking as the > > Python e-mail daemon could be run in the background and connected to by a > > short-lived client. > > Wouldn't it be better to have just one daemon, which runs as part of the > node, rather than creating a new daemon for every service you want to > offer? A new daemon for each service wouldn't be that bad, and is often necessary anways for things like freenet-mail/SMTP gateways and freenet-news/NNTP gateways. > > In the case of an e-mail daemon, this approach doesn't make all that much > > sense. If you were going to send e-mail via a short-lived program such as > > a command line client then it would be good to get rid of the daemon and > > just have the client and the node. However, the preferred way to send > > e-mail is via an SMTP daemon so that it can integrate with current mail > > readers. This must run as a daemon anyway because you don't want to have > > to start it up every time you want to send e-mail. Since it's running as a > > daemon you don't gain anything with this new API. > > Personally I think that email over Freenet without an anti-flooding > mechanism such as think cash, is extremly risky. We have already seen > submission mechanisms being flooded (see Snarfoo), and this situation > would only get worse. As far as I can see, it would be difficult to > write a think cash client which used smtp. ANYTHING like this is vulnerable. Anything, whether it is news or mail or whatever. This is an inherent problem, and there is no getting around it. > > So basically this proposal is useful when you *don't* want to run a > > daemon, and e-mail is a bad example since you do. So can you give an > > example of an application for which you wouldn't run a daemon but would > > use this functionality? > > Many. Key submission. Weblogs on Freenet. Think-cash email systems.
