Re: [freenet-dev] Using standard ports of encrypted protocols

This is a very good idea! Please go here http://freenet.uservoice.c configuration om/pages/8861-general/suggest

[freenet-dev] [freenet-cvs] r25585 - in trunk/apps/simsalabim:?. darknet rembre utils

performance > > > on popular data!) > > > > Its just a matter of implemetation. The routes terminate for different > reasons. > > When a route has terminated, the implementation checks if the data was > found. It > > corresponds to the node checking the message directly in the real node. > > But you only cache it on nodes before the one where the data was found? No? On all the nodes in the return path (from where data was found to the requestor). -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 195 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20090518/1b3d9520/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] Usability test results

Le samedi 16 mai 2009 20:10:00, Matthew Toseland a ?crit : > On Saturday 16 May 2009 15:02:19 Thomas Sachau wrote: > > Matthew Toseland schrieb: > > > On Friday 15 May 2009 16:35:40 Thomas Sachau wrote: > > >> Matthew Toseland schrieb: > > >>> On Thursday 14 May 2009 18:35:07 Thomas Sachau wrote: >

[freenet-dev] Usability test results

<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20090518/2544e319/attachment.pgp>

Re: [freenet-dev] [freenet-cvs] r25585 - in trunk/apps/simsalabim:?. darknet rembre utils

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 02:17:48PM +0100, Matthew Toseland wrote: > > > We don't store in the cache if we have stored in the store. > > > > Are you sure?! > > Hmmm, in fact we do store in both. Do you have any opinion on this? Spontaneous opinion is it may be suboptimal with unnecessary overwrit

Re: [freenet-dev] Usability test results

Le samedi 16 mai 2009 20:10:00, Matthew Toseland a écrit : > On Saturday 16 May 2009 15:02:19 Thomas Sachau wrote: > > Matthew Toseland schrieb: > > > On Friday 15 May 2009 16:35:40 Thomas Sachau wrote: > > >> Matthew Toseland schrieb: > > >>> On Thursday 14 May 2009 18:35:07 Thomas Sachau wrote: >

[freenet-dev] Usability test results

.draketo.de -- next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20090518/d2b63652/attachment.pgp>

[freenet-dev] Usability test results

next part -- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part. URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20090518/1673764e/attachment.pgp>

Re: [freenet-dev] Usability test results

Arne Babenhauserheide schrieb: > On Saturday, 16. May 2009 16:02:19 Thomas Sachau wrote: >> Additionally, Gentoo is about choice, if there is a warning, the user can >> choose, with a forcing script, there is no choice, which is a bad idea for >> this philosophy, therefor i vote against such a scri

Re: [freenet-dev] Usability test results

On Sunday, 17. May 2009 00:59:13 Matthew Toseland wrote: > Not much point hiding it if you're broadcasting the existence of nodes via > MDNSDiscovery! ...you're right for OpenNet... should have seen that before. I assume only a full "steganographic announcement" framework could help there (have