Matthew Toseland wrote: > Small isolated Freenet networks are of little value because we provide > none of the features that would make them useful at present.
OK I see what you mean now. I agree that small Freenets aren't very useful - something like WASTE or Direct Connect is probably more suitable for a small, trusted group. > Of course. But to do that we have to make small isolated Freenet's > useful. Not only that - you have to solve the problem of merging two mature networks. I don't think the swapping or routing algorithms would cope very well with that, which is why I classify Freenet in the "one big network" category. Cheers, Michael
