On Tuesday 25 September 2007 23:24, Florent Daigni?re wrote: > * Matthew Toseland <toad at amphibian.dyndns.org> [2007-09-25 20:22:24]: > > > On Tuesday 25 September 2007 17:07, bbackde at googlemail.com wrote: > > > My point is not to change the principles of the TestDDA > > > implementation. The proposal describes a different way of > > > implementation that fits for stateless clients. The current > > > implementation requires that you send out-of-order testdda requests if > > > the node sends an error, and then the client have to resend the > > > original request. The proposal ties the testdda to the initiating > > > request, and the node remembers the request until the testdda is > > > finished. > > > > The basic principle here seems sound. Making clients' life a bit easier is > > generally a good thing. Nextgens? > > Send a patch or fill in a ticket on the BTS. We discussed it 6 months ago > (http://archives.freenetproject.org/message/20070414.083225.647d5e15.en.html) > suggestions would have been welcome then but aren't anymore . I ended up > implementing what we agreed on and have no plan to spend any time > on that in the near future. By the way if you really want to make a > basic, simple client I suggest you compute the FileHash and send it > everytime.
I wasn't asking you to implement it, merely for your opinion on the idea. I will file a bug. > > NextGen$ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20070926/97afe056/attachment.pgp>
