ced-lacrambe at ifrance.com wrote:

> Oskar Sandberg wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, Nov 14, 2001 at 12:21:12PM +0100, Are wrote:
>>
>>> I tried inserting a 700mb redundant splitfile. It inserted 6 segments,
>>> segment 1-5 was 192 blocks each, segment 6 was 56 blocks. But at the end
>>> after 12 hours of inserting I got this:
>>>
>>
>> Don't you have somewhere else to put your DivX movies? I hope Freenet
>> will one day be stable enough to let people put in whatever they want,
>> but it clearly isn't at the moment - so what is the point?
>>
> it could be something great to reduce memory requirements for fec 
> encoding /decoding process i don't think fec could be correctly tested 
> without HUGE files like divx or iso cd images.
> fec streaming  seems possible  according to the onionfec website large 
> file could be downloaded  like fec stream. uling multipart-download-like 
> system   to prevent blocs from diseapearing.

The point is not that testing the fec thingy is bad, bad inserting 
actually in Freenet might be a very bad thing at this stage. Lets say we 
have 10 nodes a 500MG at the moment in the net. Inserting one divx with 
a HTL=10 could destroy all existing data on all nodes then. The longer I 
think about it the more I think that large binary data (opposed to html 
sites) will be the death of freenet. Other file sharing systems might be 
better suited for these mega-gigabyte shares...

Sebastian
P.S. This is just a confused thought of a drunk individual rather than 
the official Freenet opinion.....................


_______________________________________________
Devl mailing list
Devl at freenetproject.org
http://lists.freenetproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devl

Reply via email to