On Tue, 09 Oct 2001, Ian Clarke wrote: > On Wed, Oct 10, 2001 at 12:21:24AM -0500, thelema wrote: > > I don't understand why it makes more sense for fproxy to give your your > > noderef. Can you explain this? > > It doesn't nescessarily, that is simply one example of how the FCP > functionality *could* be used. > > Ian.
I'm trying to understand the total usage scenario for a FCP getref command. I don't see how it benefits the user at all to have fproxy (or any other client) giving your your coderef. That's the part that if you could explain, I'd be satisfied. Thelema (glad that this seems to be coming to a head) -- 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/df49351b/attachment.pgp>
