Sorry, removed him from the subscriber list... On Sat, Aug 19, 2006 at 10:18:34AM +0200, Stefan Gr?nberg wrote: > wtf is this shit spam? > > MicrOfirM wrote: > > > > > > > >Hay, Hell?, Szervusz(tok)! > > > > > > > > I'm publikacio HERBALIFE -< ID:F7003203 > assistance > > > >pack HUF 30200,-Ft, - cirka ~ 160 *$ * > > > >http://www.myvideotalk.net/ > > > >Thank Yu very much! *__* > > > >//:Add tov?bb & barataid h?l?sak lesznek ?rte!:// > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Eredeti ?zenet -- > > *Felad?: *devl-request at freenetproject.org > > <mailto:devl-request at freenetproject.org> > > *C?mzett: *devl at freenetproject.org > > <mailto:devl at freenetproject.org> > > *M?solat: * > > *Elk?ldve: *2006.08.18 14:00 > > *T?ma: *Devl Digest, Vol 11, Issue 33 > > > > > > Send Devl mailing list submissions to > > devl at freenetproject.org <mailto:devl at freenetproject.org> > > > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit > > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to > > devl-request at freenetproject.org > > <mailto:devl-request at freenetproject.org> > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at > > devl-owner at freenetproject.org > > <mailto:devl-owner at freenetproject.org> > > > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more > > specific > > than "Re: Contents of Devl digest..." > > > > > > Today's Topics: > > > > 1. Re: "Insert Files" - why? (David 'Bombe' Roden) > > 2. Re: Darknet and opennet: semi-separate networks? > > (Matthew Toseland) > > 3. Re: Darknet and opennet: semi-separate networks? > > (Matthew Toseland) > > 4. Re: "Insert Files" - why? (Matthew Toseland) > > 5. Re: Darknet and opennet: semi-separate networks? (Ian Clarke) > > 6. Re: "Insert Files" - why? (Jano) > > > > > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > Message: 1 > > Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 22:35:21 +0200 > > From: David 'Bombe' Roden <droden at gmail.com> > > <mailto:droden at gmail.com%3E> > > Subject: Re: [freenet-dev] "Insert Files" - why? > > To: devl at freenetproject.org <mailto:devl at freenetproject.org> > > Message-ID: <200608172235.22001.droden at gmail.com> > > <mailto:200608172235.22001.droden at gmail.com%3E> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" > > > > On Thursday 17 August 2006 22:06, Ian Clarke wrote: > > > > > Hmm, that is kind of a specialist need, does it really have > > to have > > > such prominence on the FProxy page? Could it be a plugin > > instead? > > > > As nextgens suggested I'll remove the link from the navigation > > bar and > > include a link on the queue page. > > > > > > > I think $HOME might be better. > > > > Okay. > > > > > > > Ian. > > > > David > > -------------- next part -------------- > > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > > Name: not available > > Type: application/pgp-signature > > Size: 191 bytes > > Desc: not available > > Url : > > > > http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20060817/7c3958b7/attachment.pgp > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 2 > > Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 22:10:09 +0100 > > From: Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> > > <mailto:toad at amphibian.dyndns.org%3E> > > Subject: Re: [freenet-dev] Darknet and opennet: semi-separate > > networks? > > To: Discussion of development issues <devl at freenetproject.org> > > <mailto:devl at freenetproject.org%3E> > > Message-ID: <20060817211009.GA19497 at amphibian.dyndns.org> > > <mailto:20060817211009.GA19497 at amphibian.dyndns.org%3E> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 10:16:26AM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote: > > > On 17 Aug 2006, at 09:58, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > > >On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 09:37:02AM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote: > > > >>I don't believe that the darknet and opennet will be > > weakly connected > > > >>as you suggest, but neither of us can no for sure until we > > see it. > > > > > > > >We can know for near certain that darknets operating in hostile > > > >environments will be weakly connected to the opennet, and > > probably to > > > >other darknets too, for the simple reason that they CANNOT use > > > >opennet. > > > > > > No, but they can be connected to peers outside the hostile > > > environment that can be promiscuous. > > > > Sure, but the hope is that there will be several very large > > (thousands > > of nodes) chinese/iranian/etc darknets, which would have to have > > relatively few "uplink" nodes, not just hundreds of ten node ones. > > > > > > Ian. > > -- > > Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org > > <mailto:toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> > > Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ > > ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. > > -------------- next part -------------- > > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > > Name: not available > > Type: application/pgp-signature > > Size: 189 bytes > > Desc: Digital signature > > Url : > > > > http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20060817/e31164bc/attachment.pgp > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 3 > > Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 22:15:20 +0100 > > From: Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> > > <mailto:toad at amphibian.dyndns.org%3E> > > Subject: Re: [freenet-dev] Darknet and opennet: semi-separate > > networks? > > To: Discussion of development issues <devl at freenetproject.org> > > <mailto:devl at freenetproject.org%3E> > > Message-ID: <20060817211520.GB19497 at amphibian.dyndns.org> > > <mailto:20060817211520.GB19497 at amphibian.dyndns.org%3E> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 12:16:34PM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote: > > > > > > On 17 Aug 2006, at 10:42, Evan Daniel wrote: > > > >On 8/17/06, Ian Clarke <ian at revver.com> > > <mailto:ian at revver.com%3E> wrote: > > > >>On 17 Aug 2006, at 09:58, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > > >> > > > >>On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 09:37:02AM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote: > > > >> > > > >>I don't believe that the darknet and opennet will be > > weakly connected > > > >>as you suggest, but neither of us can no for sure until we > > see it. > > > >> > > > >>We can know for near certain that darknets operating in > > hostile > > > >>environments will be weakly connected to the opennet, and > > probably to > > > >>other darknets too, for the simple reason that they CANNOT > > use > > > >>opennet. > > > >> > > > >>No, but they can be connected to peers outside the hostile > > > >>environment that can be promiscuous. > > > > > > > >Can they? If the outside peer is promiscuous, then it can be > > > >harvested (with some greater amount of effort than for 0.5, > > right?). > > > >So can't a hostile gov't harvest external promiscuous nodes > > and block > > > >all traffic to / from them? Then you'd need a user behind the > > > >firewall to connect to a darknet-only node outside the > > firewall, which > > > >would then connect to promiscuous nodes via darknet > > connections. > > > > > > Perhaps, in which case the solution is for someone inside the > > > firewall to connect to a darknet node outside the firewall, > > they can > > > then connect to opennet nodes. In this case the user in the > > hostile > > > regime is still just 2 hops from the opennet. > > > > There is a limited supply of friendly westerners, and there is > > also a > > limited intersection of content between the two networks. If > > the network > > is to work well for the chinese then it will have to scale > > *internally*, > > so that people can add their friends without rapidly slowing > > down their > > own access. What you suggest is analogous to me running a > > proxy for a > > few of my chinese friends; if they connect their friends to > > that proxy, > > and their friends connect their friends, pretty soon it is > > intolerably > > slow. You need a large network with lots of internal nodes > > connected to > > each other, and relatively few external connections. > > > > > > >That might be a problem... And it's definitely a way in > > which having > > > >an open-net hurts the darknet (though I do agree that we have a > > > >defacto open-net right now). > > > > > > I think this final parenthesized point is the key, we don't > > have a > > > darknet right now, we have a very very flawed opennet. This > > > situation will persist until we provide a decent opennet > > solution. > > > > True, we have a flawed opennet with some darknet links. > > > > > > Ian. > > -- > > Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org > > <mailto:toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> > > Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ > > ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. > > -------------- next part -------------- > > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > > Name: not available > > Type: application/pgp-signature > > Size: 189 bytes > > Desc: Digital signature > > Url : > > > > http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20060817/9d972b5e/attachment.pgp > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 4 > > Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 22:16:39 +0100 > > From: Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> > > <mailto:toad at amphibian.dyndns.org%3E> > > Subject: Re: [freenet-dev] "Insert Files" - why? > > To: Discussion of development issues <devl at freenetproject.org> > > <mailto:devl at freenetproject.org%3E> > > Message-ID: <20060817211639.GC19497 at amphibian.dyndns.org> > > <mailto:20060817211639.GC19497 at amphibian.dyndns.org%3E> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" > > > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 12:05:22PM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote: > > > I don't really understand why we have replicated the "Browse > > File" > > > functionality built into all browsers in the new "Insert Files" > > > section of FProxy? A case of "Not Invented Here"? > > > > Temporary space. If we force the browser to upload it > > directly, it is > > stored in many more places than if we tell the node where the > > file is - > > which no browser will do; they must send the filename, not the > > full > > path. > > -- > > Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org > > <mailto:toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> > > Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ > > ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. > > -------------- next part -------------- > > A non-text attachment was scrubbed... > > Name: not available > > Type: application/pgp-signature > > Size: 189 bytes > > Desc: Digital signature > > Url : > > > > http://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20060817/e99de63b/attachment.pgp > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 5 > > Date: Thu, 17 Aug 2006 14:35:24 -0700 > > From: Ian Clarke <ian at locut.us> <mailto:ian at locut.us%3E> > > Subject: Re: [freenet-dev] Darknet and opennet: semi-separate > > networks? > > To: Discussion of development issues <devl at freenetproject.org> > > <mailto:devl at freenetproject.org%3E> > > Cc: Oskar Sandberg <ossa at math.chalmers.se> > > <mailto:ossa at math.chalmers.se%3E> > > Message-ID: <45F4C14A-ED56-46ED-AC85-33EB3C24BD1F at locut.us> > > <mailto:45F4C14A-ED56-46ED-AC85-33EB3C24BD1F at locut.us%3E> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; > > format=flowed > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > (copying Oskar - I think you will want to read this) > > > > On 17 Aug 2006, at 14:15, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2006 at 12:16:34PM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote: > > >> Perhaps, in which case the solution is for someone inside the > > >> firewall to connect to a darknet node outside the firewall, > > they can > > >> then connect to opennet nodes. In this case the user in the > > hostile > > >> regime is still just 2 hops from the opennet. > > > > > > There is a limited supply of friendly westerners, and there > > is also a > > > limited intersection of content between the two networks. If > > the > > > network > > > is to work well for the chinese then it will have to scale > > > *internally*, > > > so that people can add their friends without rapidly slowing > > down > > > their > > > own access. What you suggest is analogous to me running a > > proxy for a > > > few of my chinese friends; if they connect their friends to > > that > > > proxy, > > > and their friends connect their friends, pretty soon it is > > intolerably > > > slow. You need a large network with lots of internal nodes > > > connected to > > > each other, and relatively few external connections. > > > > I agree that if we end up in a situation where we have large > > parts of > > the network only connected to each other through a very small > > number > > of links that this will be problematic as those links will > > quickly be > > overloaded. I'm not yet convinced that this situation will occur, > > but I agree that it is a possibility. > > > > I think the fundamental reason for this problem is the migration > > towards a more simplistic notion of node specialization in > > 0.7. The > > more flexible approach of 0.5 where nodes can have more than one > > specialization, and varying degrees of specialization in > > response to > > demand, I believe, would be able to deal with this situation. > > 0.7's > > simpler approach may not. > > > > I don't think the solution is to have some different routing > > behavior > > depending on whether it is a darknet or an opennet node, > > because this > > doesn't solve the problem that the information you want is > > still very > > likely to be outside your isolated corner of Freenet. Perhaps if > > nodes maintained two specializations, one for "local darknet" and > > another for "global opennet", that could solve the problem, > > but that > > strikes me as being rather ugly.os > > > > For now I suggest that we wait and see, if we do start to see a > > network topology that essentially consists of multiple small > > world > > networks that are poorly connected to each-other, then we may > > need to > > consider moving back to something closer to the 0.5 approach > > to node > > specialization. > > > > Ian. > > > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > > Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (Darwin) > > > > iD8DBQFE5OEcQtgxRWSmsqwRAq04AJ9eJopVTpgKg8FofnukjGIow5PzKQCdGTb1 > > ePKFPPg9tWcqHhg3LYT2Ncg= > > =roc7 > > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > Message: 6 > > Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 00:52:29 +0200 > > From: Jano <alejandro at mosteo.com> <mailto:alejandro at > > mosteo.com%3E> > > Subject: [freenet-dev] Re: "Insert Files" - why? > > To: devl at freenetproject.org <mailto:devl at freenetproject.org> > > Message-ID: 1 at sea.gmane.org> <mailto:1 at sea.gmane.org%3E> > > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > > > > Ian Clarke wrote: > > > > > > > > On 17 Aug 2006, at 12:49, David 'Bombe' Roden wrote: > > > > > >> On Thursday 17 August 2006 21:05, Ian Clarke wrote: > > >> > > >>> I don't really understand why we have replicated the > > "Browse File" > > >>> functionality built into all browsers in the new "Insert > > Files" > > >>> section of FProxy? A case of "Not Invented Here"? > > >> > > >> In the future I intend to run the node on a different > > computer so > > >> the "Insert Files" box is essentially completely useless if > > the file I > > >> want to insert is on the machine running the node. > > > > > > Hmm, that is kind of a specialist need, does it really have > > to have > > > such prominence on the FProxy page? Could it be a plugin > > instead? > > > > I don't think is that specialist need. I'm doing it, for > > example, and the > > reason is quite clear: having a box 24/7 is not easy, so once > > you have one > > you want to have your node here, and use it via ssh tunneling from > > everywhere (this in fact works fantastic with > > frost/thaw/browsing). > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Devl mailing list > > Devl at freenetproject.org <mailto:Devl at freenetproject.org> > > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl > > > > End of Devl Digest, Vol 11, Issue 33 > > ************************************ > > > >--------------------------Hirdet?s----------------------------- > >* SZERETNE EGY KIV?L? EMAIL C?MET?!* > >Ne vesz?dj?n m?s free szolg?ltat?kkal! > >V?lassza a min?s?get ?s a megbizhat?s?got! > >Klikk ide: http://www.vipmail.hu > > > >------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Devl mailing list > >Devl at freenetproject.org > >http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
> _______________________________________________ > Devl mailing list > Devl at freenetproject.org > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20060819/67fe75e5/attachment.pgp>
