On Tue, 09 Oct 2001, Ian Clarke wrote: > Anyone whose IP address changes frequently enough for this to be an issue > shouldn't be giving their seed.ref file out to anyone in the first place, > making the whole argument moot (having said that, I disagree with your > argument - but since it is moot, I can't be arsed to debate it). > I agree.
> >>Also, with regards to a .5 release, FCP or node-generated seed.ref will > >>accomplish the same task; but there would need to be an actual > >>FCP-to-file-on-the-hard-disk implementation ready and bundled with the > >>.5 software to be of any use. > >> > >I agree; if we did put the localnoderef command into FCP, we'd also have > >to have a command-line interface to it as part of the release. > > > Actually it would make more sense to provide an interface to this through > fproxy, but expediency before a release is no basis upon which to make > design decisions. > > Ian. > I don't understand why it makes more sense for fproxy to give your your noderef. Can you explain this? Thelema -- E-mail: thelema314 at bigfoot.com If you love something, set it free. GPG 1536g/B9C5D1F7 fpr:075A A3F7 F70B 1397 345D A67E 70AA 820B A806 F95D -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20011010/72e6275e/attachment.pgp>
