On Saturday 25 January 2003 15:07, you wrote: > > 1) This doesn't belong in Fred's JVM. We have enough problems > > undertanding/bounding fred's resource consumption as it is. > > I agree - that is what plugin architectures are for. What do you mean?
When you add a servlet to the mainport configuration setting you are running it in fred's JVM. Where else are people plugging things in? > > > 2) How do you plan to address QOS? I have asked this question several > > times and each time it is ignored. > > If you really want to do streaming you need to have a reasonable QOS > > gaurantee. I don't see how you are going to get this from fred. > > Increasingly, streaming protocols operate over TCP - what QOS guarantee > does TCP offer? At least the lower bounds can be charcterized. Perhaps you could help do the same for freenet. See below. > Such streaming protocols address this using buffering, > there is no reason why we can't do the same. The latencies in Freenet are orders of magnitude larger. I would be interested in a principled analysis of what it would take to make this really work. How much buffering? What minimum average rate? > > Again, you have no more evidence. Well I have never seen 30k/sec sustained average transfer rate for a recently inserted SplitFiles. > that it won't work than I do that it > will. > Why not encourage someone to try it so that we can all find out? > Nothing ventured, nothing gained. I don't think I could stop fish if I wanted to, which I don't. Pointing out that the Freenet architecture provides no QOS, is not what I would characterize as discouragement. It's more like technical due diligence. > Why not encourage people to do things which have a reason > Personally I am optimistic, with > Splitfiles I have been seeing overall download rates of around 30k/sec, > which is more than enough for a FM quality ogg stream. Which SplitFiles? What tests have you run? That is about 5 to 10 times the speed I see for non-established SplitFiles. And higher than the average transfer I see even for most established ones. Why don't you organize some tests of SplitFIle retrieval rates? That way the discussion would be less anecdotal. I am hindered in my testing by the lack of publically available "legitimate" -- not porn, not copyright infringing -- SplitFiles. Having a bunch of small known (1 - 64M) SplitFiles in the network would be really useful. If you (or anyone else) wants to insert insert some stuff, use freenet.client.cli.Main. It's the only client I am aware of that supports checksumming. Don't use fproxy. It doesn't use the new AutoRequester SplitFile insertion code yet. --gj > > Ian. _______________________________________________ devl mailing list devl at freenetproject.org http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
