[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
Thank you for the reply. I'm not looking to be argumentative, and acknowledge Ian's request to take this to a different board, but must ask why the Freenet group decide to direct new users to the new alpha 0.7 network instead of the established 0.5 network before there was an open net? Especially since the 0.7 network is undergoing many changes with several critical bug fixes. I also hope you understand that there is a large number of dedicated users on the 0.5 network that would like to try the new network, but won't if there is no open net. On Thursday 24 August 2006 17:26, Matthew Toseland wrote: > It has around 600 users judging from recent estimates, a fair amount of > content, and a lot of frost chatter. The stable branch was updated > fairly regularly; the purpose of having a separate stable network was so > we could test disruptive network changes. We may in future (after we are > out of 0.7 alpha) test changes on the testnet, but right now we develop > stuff in SVN, get people to test it from the testing-latest jar, and > then commit a version bump and deploy the new jar generally. > > On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 08:06:51PM -0700, an ominous cow herd wrote: > > Thank you for the reply. I was hoping that you might actually answer the > > other part of the message > > > > The past Freenet had two branches, the stable and unstable. ?The unstable > > branch was the one where active coding was performed. ?The stable branch > > did not get updated often if at all. > > > > My question, which has yet to be answered, is why did the Freenet project > > break with the previous release model and start directing new users to > > the unstable alpha 0.7 release? > > > > When I talk of stable and unstable, I'm referring to the the code. As we > > can see, the 0.7 network is still undergoing a lot of changes with > > several critical bug fixes. The 0.5 network didn't have many changes > > near the end. The 0.5 network has thousands of user and a lot of content. > > What I have heard of the 0.7 network is that it has only a couple > > hundred users and very little content. > > > > ps. There are many others like me who would like to try the 0.7 network, > > but will not if there is no open net. > > > > On Wednesday 23 August 2006 00:34, Ian Clarke wrote: > > > On 22 Aug 2006, at 20:37, an ominous cow herd wrote: > > > > You never experienced World War I, but I bet you know something > > > > about it. > > > > > > Yes, but I wouldn't lecture those who had actually experienced it, > > > and I think you will find Freenet 0.7 a somewhat more pleasant > > > experience than the first world war. > > > > > > Ian. > > > > > > > > > Ian Clarke: Co-Founder & Chief Scientist Revver, Inc. > > > phone: 323.871.2828 | personal blog - http://locut.us/blog > > > > ___ > > Support mailing list > > Support at freenetproject.org > > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > > Unsubscribe at > > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or > > mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
Doesn't have anything to do with 0.5 as far as I can tell. Except that in 0.5 you don't have to capture PCs to capture people on the network, in 0.7you do, making it quite a bit more secure. On 8/25/06, Evan Daniel wrote: > > On 8/25/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com wrote: > > > > >It should not be possible to trace them easily. Of course, if his PC > gets > > >captured, that's possible. > > > > If the person was busted their computer would be captured. > > > > I guess the only safe way is to run freenet from inside an encrypted > > (truecrypt or the like) partition or container and just hope freenet > doesn't > > write information outside that container, no matter what the OS. > > I'm confused... is this supposed to be an argument in favor of 0.5??? > > Evan > ___ > Support mailing list > Support at freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060825/4e71aeff/attachment.html>
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
>From: "Evan Daniel" >Reply-To: evand at pobox.com, support at freenetproject.org >To: support at freenetproject.org >Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7 >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 12:55:31 -0400 > >On 8/25/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com wrote: >> >> >It should not be possible to trace them easily. Of course, if his PC >>gets >> >captured, that's possible. >> >>If the person was busted their computer would be captured. >> >>I guess the only safe way is to run freenet from inside an encrypted >>(truecrypt or the like) partition or container and just hope freenet >>doesn't >>write information outside that container, no matter what the OS. > >I'm confused... is this supposed to be an argument in favor of 0.5??? > >Evan No it's a discussion about security. Sounds like there are security issues in either version. It's just a matter of which security limitations you are wanting to accept. _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
It should not be possible to trace them easily. Of course, if his PC gets captured, that's possible. On 8/25/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com wrote: > > > > > >No, only he is busted. > > > How do you figure that? Doesn't he have connections that canthen be traced > and then the connections of those traced? > > _ > Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! > http://search.msn.com/ > > ___ > Support mailing list > Support at freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060825/e53494c8/attachment.html>
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
No, only he is busted. On 8/25/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com wrote: > > > > > >Except that probably one of your friends knows someone on an other > network, > >exchanges refs, and bang!, you've got a big worldwide network again. > > > > > > Or one of them goes into an IRC chat and exchanges the information and > bang > you're all busted. > > _ > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! > http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > > ___ > Support mailing list > Support at freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060825/dcdea34e/attachment.html>
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
Except that probably one of your friends knows someone on an other network, exchanges refs, and bang!, you've got a big worldwide network again. On 8/25/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com wrote: > > > > >From: "Lars Juel Nielsen" > >Reply-To: support at freenetproject.org > >To: support at freenetproject.org > >Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7 > >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 01:54:16 +0200 > > > >On 8/25/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com wrote: > >> >From: "Lars Juel Nielsen" > >> > >> >to take down a darknet you have to find participants and trick > >> >them to letting you in and then you can start finding out which hosts > >> >are part of it. > >> > >>Wait - Wait - You don't have to be tricked into letting someone in. All > >>they > >>have to do is go to the IRC Chat and advertise they have freenet and > want > >>to > >>exchange information with someone. Someone exchanges information with > them > >>and they in. Or are you saying everyone who joined was tricked into > >>joining > >>Freenet in the first place? > >> > > > >For now that is true, they could just go on IRC and get connected but > >I'm talking about in the long run and people who are way too cautious > >to do something as silly as that. Anyway the IRC thing is just for > >bootstrapping the main network the devs are trying to create. People > >who want to have their own private darknets can easily do so too. > > > > I get it, freenet is not a worldwide community (openet), it's a bunch of > private nets (darknets). Instead of growing to be huge like 0.5, 0.7 is > inherently made to be small, unless you want to advertise on IRC. For now, > my 'advertised on IRC' machine, is used for testing purposes only. Once > things are running I remove all of my connections and build my own darknet > of people I know and we use it as a private place to meet. > > _ > FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar - get it now! > http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ > > ___ > Support mailing list > Support at freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060825/f10a7939/attachment.html>
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
>It should not be possible to trace them easily. Of course, if his PC gets >captured, that's possible. If the person was busted their computer would be captured. I guess the only safe way is to run freenet from inside an encrypted (truecrypt or the like) partition or container and just hope freenet doesn't write information outside that container, no matter what the OS. _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
On 8/25/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com wrote: > > >It should not be possible to trace them easily. Of course, if his PC gets > >captured, that's possible. > > If the person was busted their computer would be captured. > > I guess the only safe way is to run freenet from inside an encrypted > (truecrypt or the like) partition or container and just hope freenet doesn't > write information outside that container, no matter what the OS. I'm confused... is this supposed to be an argument in favor of 0.5??? Evan
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
> >No, only he is busted. > How do you figure that? Doesn't he have connections that canthen be traced and then the connections of those traced? _ Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.com/
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
> >Except that probably one of your friends knows someone on an other network, >exchanges refs, and bang!, you've got a big worldwide network again. > > Or one of them goes into an IRC chat and exchanges the information and bang you're all busted. _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
0) be sure you have Java version 1.5 or 1.6 (1.4 will/should work too) - type "java -version" in a console and watch the output 1) download these two files into a separate directory you've created forehand: - http://downloads.freenetproject.org/alpha/freenet-r10260-snapshot.jar - http://downloads.freenetproject.org/alpha/freenet-ext.jar 2) change to the directory they're in 3) rename "freenet-r10260-snapshot.jar" to "freenet.jar" 4) run "java -cp freenet.jar;freenet-ext.jar;%CLASSPATH%;. freenet.node.Node 5) report problems :) >On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 19:37:56 -0400, Juiceman wrote: >> > >> For those of you have never even tried to use 0.7 but are complaining about >> it: >> 1. You shouldn't argue until you at least try it. >> 2. It performs quite well IMO compared to 0.5 >> 3. Almost every app from 0.5 works with 0.7 now (or there is an >> equivalent program available) >> 4. It is a complete re-write of almost all the code and uses a >> dramatically different data format so backwards compatibility is not >> possible. Move forward. :) > >To convince me you need not try for ready am I to migrate to 0.7 >Like others recently posting however I am Windows 98 user not able to >change OS. >Tried have I various install methods to use. So far Failed have they all. > >Seeking guidance am I, to complete the migration with success. From others >have >I seen postings in their quest similar, yet ignored are they all. > >For help thank I you all. > > >___ >Support mailing list >Support at freenetproject.org >http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support >Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support >Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
>From: "Lars Juel Nielsen" >Reply-To: support at freenetproject.org >To: support at freenetproject.org >Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7 >Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 01:54:16 +0200 > >On 8/25/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com wrote: >> >From: "Lars Juel Nielsen" >> >> >to take down a darknet you have to find participants and trick >> >them to letting you in and then you can start finding out which hosts >> >are part of it. >> >>Wait - Wait - You don't have to be tricked into letting someone in. All >>they >>have to do is go to the IRC Chat and advertise they have freenet and want >>to >>exchange information with someone. Someone exchanges information with them >>and they in. Or are you saying everyone who joined was tricked into >>joining >>Freenet in the first place? >> > >For now that is true, they could just go on IRC and get connected but >I'm talking about in the long run and people who are way too cautious >to do something as silly as that. Anyway the IRC thing is just for >bootstrapping the main network the devs are trying to create. People >who want to have their own private darknets can easily do so too. > I get it, freenet is not a worldwide community (openet), it's a bunch of private nets (darknets). Instead of growing to be huge like 0.5, 0.7 is inherently made to be small, unless you want to advertise on IRC. For now, my 'advertised on IRC' machine, is used for testing purposes only. Once things are running I remove all of my connections and build my own darknet of people I know and we use it as a private place to meet. _ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar - get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 19:37:56 -0400, Juiceman wrote: > > For those of you have never even tried to use 0.7 but are complaining about > it: > 1. You shouldn't argue until you at least try it. > 2. It performs quite well IMO compared to 0.5 > 3. Almost every app from 0.5 works with 0.7 now (or there is an > equivalent program available) > 4. It is a complete re-write of almost all the code and uses a > dramatically different data format so backwards compatibility is not > possible. Move forward. :) To convince me you need not try for ready am I to migrate to 0.7 Like others recently posting however I am Windows 98 user not able to change OS. Tried have I various install methods to use. So far Failed have they all. Seeking guidance am I, to complete the migration with success. From others have I seen postings in their quest similar, yet ignored are they all. For help thank I you all.
Migration path, please! (Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0, 5 and 0, 7
Juiceman wrote: >With 10 connections, the data that could intercepted by one attacker >is roughly 10%. The problem is the attacker doesn't know how many >connections you have, so you could just be passing on data from any >number of connections you have. It's currently trivialy easy to find out if a request of a connected peer was forwarded by that peer or if it was a local request from that peer because local requests aren't stored in the datastore/-cache. (http://wiki.freenetproject.org/FreenetZeroPointSevenSecurity, search for the headline "Datastore") Thus you only have to probe the datastore of the requesting peer after sending the data to it and can find out if it was forwarded or originated there. In my opinion this isn't really acceptable on either a dark- or opennet (perhaps on a true darknet but that doesn't exist right now) but it certainly would cause havoc on an opennet. -- next part -- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/support/attachments/20060825/0fe73dd0/attachment.html>
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
On 8/25/06, urza9814 at gmail.com wrote: > True, but the opennet isn't illegal. > I'm not in any way saying the darknet shouldn't be added...it's a > great feature...but freenet has always been an opennet, and that > should be done first. People who want a darknet are probably already > using other programs like Waste. If they start thinking about making > the opennet form of freenet illegal, we'll know long before it > happens. And there will be plenty of people (EFF, ACLU, etc) fighting > it. I realize there are other countries where they can't use an > opennet, but like I said, there are other darknet programs out there. > That's not what freenet is. Waste doesn't scale nearly as well as freenet 0.7 so there is a reason to do it. Besides, if we don't get a darknet it'll all be a wasted effort in a few years when they outlaw freenet for some reason which I believe will happen and I'd be surprised if it take more than 5 more years. > > On 8/24/06, Lars Juel Nielsen wrote: > > On 8/24/06, urza9814 at gmail.com wrote: > > > "As I see it 0.7 relies on a bunch of people hooking up by sharing node > > > information. I may be a part of a freenet 0.7 network that consists of > > > less > > > than 20 people. Out there somewhere else is another group of people, but > > > that group might be 100 people. Unless someone in the 2 groups makes a > > > connection, shares node information, the 2 groups don't talk to each > > > other. > > > Making matters worse, the only connection they have is through that one > > > shared connection. There is no redundancy. Am I wrong in this assumption?" > > > > > > Yup...pretty much. That's why so many people refuse to switch to 0.7 > > > until there's a working opennet. I'm one of them. With an opennet, you > > > connect to anyone who's online, with multiple connections. Don't have > > > to trade references and you get a lot more connections with no effort. > > > > What will you do when freenet is made illegal and all the nodes are > > being harvested and blocked by a national firewall? Then the whole > > network fall apart, this can not happen with a darknet if it's done > > right. To take down a darknet you have to find participants and trick > > them to letting you in and then you can start finding out which hosts > > are part of it. > > > > It's a lot easier, cheaper and faster to take down an opennet than a > > darknet. > > > > > Not totally sure about the 'if the one node linking them dies you lose > > > all that data' part...seems like that's how it'd be handled, but I > > > haven't looked into 0.7 too much...because it has no opennet, so I > > > have no use for it. > > > > > > On 8/24/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com wrote: > > > > What about a pipe to the 0.5 freenet from 0.7 that allows access to the > > > > data? A 1-way street. 0.7 can add data to the 0.7 freenet, but can and > > > > to > > > > the 0.5 freenet. Only access the data. From what I have gathered, > > > > 'inserting' data into freenet is not a quick task. > > > > > > > > As I see it 0.7 relies on a bunch of people hooking up by sharing node > > > > information. I may be a part of a freenet 0.7 network that consists of > > > > less > > > > than 20 people. Out there somewhere else is another group of people, but > > > > that group might be 100 people. Unless someone in the 2 groups makes a > > > > connection, shares node information, the 2 groups don't talk to each > > > > other. > > > > Making matters worse, the only connection they have is through that one > > > > shared connection. There is no redundancy. Am I wrong in this > > > > assumption? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: urza9814 at gmail.com > > > > >Reply-To: support at freenetproject.org > > > > >To: support at freenetproject.org > > > > >Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7 > > > > >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 15:01:46 -0400 > > > > > > > > > >Freenet 0.5 is an opennet. You connect to any random node that happens > > > > >to be on. Freenet 0.7 doesn't have this yet. In 0.7, there is no main > > > > >network. There might be now, but the idea of the way it currently is > > > > >setup is to allow small groups to connect without connecting to > > > > >everyone else. Pretty much, there's nowhere for the content to go. > > > > >It'd be like trying to move everything on the internet to your local > > > > >LAN. > > > > >That, and it's just a complete program re-write I believe. It's quite > > > > >easy to 'convert' the content...open a page, save it, and then > > > > >re-upload it. The data stores work differently, and anyways the data > > > > >is distributed, so there wouldn't be any easy way to move it over. > > > > > > > > > >On 8/24/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com wrote: > > > > >>I've got a question for the developers. > > > > >> > > > > >>First a couple of comments. > > > > >> > > > > >>I've been watching the thread 0.5 vs 0.7, and although you want to > > > > >>move it > > > > >>somewhere else I welcome it. > > > > >>
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
On 8/25/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com wrote: > >From: "Lars Juel Nielsen" > > >to take down a darknet you have to find participants and trick > >them to letting you in and then you can start finding out which hosts > >are part of it. > > Wait - Wait - You don't have to be tricked into letting someone in. All they > have to do is go to the IRC Chat and advertise they have freenet and want to > exchange information with someone. Someone exchanges information with them > and they in. Or are you saying everyone who joined was tricked into joining > Freenet in the first place? > For now that is true, they could just go on IRC and get connected but I'm talking about in the long run and people who are way too cautious to do something as silly as that. Anyway the IRC thing is just for bootstrapping the main network the devs are trying to create. People who want to have their own private darknets can easily do so too. > I guess you mean there will be all these small darknets of people who are > isolated from the rest of the wrold because they don't know anyone they can > trust so they will never give out their node information. If that were the > case, I wouldn't be running a freenet server right now. I would be me, with > freenet running; an isolated entity within my own darknet, because I've > never met anyone who has ever said they were running freenet. > > _ > FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar - get it now! > http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ > > ___ > Support mailing list > Support at freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe >
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
; > >> > >> > >>_ > >> > >>Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's > >FREE! > >> > >>http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > >> > >> > >> > >>___ > >> > >>Support mailing list > >> > >>Support at freenetproject.org > >> > >>http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > >> > >>Unsubscribe at > >> > >>http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > >> > >>Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > >> > >> > >> > > > >> > > > >> > >-- > >> > > > >> > >http://www.spreadfirefox.com/?q=affiliates=0=57;> >> > >border="0" alt="Get Firefox!" title="Get Firefox!" > >> > > >>src="http://sfx-images.mozilla.org/affiliates/Buttons/180x60/blank.gif"/> > >> > >___ > >> > >Support mailing list > >> > >Support at freenetproject.org > >> > >http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > >> > >Unsubscribe at > >> > >http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > >> > >Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > >> > > >> > _ > >> > Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's > >FREE! > >> > http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ > >> > > >> > ___ > >> > Support mailing list > >> > Support at freenetproject.org > >> > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > >> > Unsubscribe at > >http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > >> > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > >> > > >> > >> > >> -- > >> > >> >href="http://www.spreadfirefox.com/?q=affiliatesid=0t=57;> >> border="0" alt="Get Firefox!" title="Get Firefox!" > >> > >src="http://sfx-images.mozilla.org/affiliates/Buttons/180x60/blank.gif"/> > >> ___ > >> Support mailing list > >> Support at freenetproject.org > >> http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > >> Unsubscribe at > >http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > >> Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > >> > >___ > >Support mailing list > >Support at freenetproject.org > >http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > >Unsubscribe at > >http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > >Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > > > > > -- > > http://www.spreadfirefox.com/?q=affiliatesid=0t=57;> border="0" alt="Get Firefox!" title="Get Firefox!" > src="http://sfx-images.mozilla.org/affiliates/Buttons/180x60/blank.gif"/> > ___ > Support mailing list > Support at freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at > http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > -- 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/support/attachments/20060825/0c034580/attachment.pgp>
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
It has around 600 users judging from recent estimates, a fair amount of content, and a lot of frost chatter. The stable branch was updated fairly regularly; the purpose of having a separate stable network was so we could test disruptive network changes. We may in future (after we are out of 0.7 alpha) test changes on the testnet, but right now we develop stuff in SVN, get people to test it from the testing-latest jar, and then commit a version bump and deploy the new jar generally. On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 08:06:51PM -0700, an ominous cow herd wrote: > Thank you for the reply. I was hoping that you might actually answer the > other part of the message > > The past Freenet had two branches, the stable and unstable. ?The unstable > branch was the one where active coding was performed. ?The stable branch did > not get updated often if at all. > > My question, which has yet to be answered, is why did the Freenet project > break with the previous release model and start directing new users to the > unstable alpha 0.7 release? > > When I talk of stable and unstable, I'm referring to the the code. As we can > see, the 0.7 network is still undergoing a lot of changes with several > critical bug fixes. The 0.5 network didn't have many changes near the end. > The 0.5 network has thousands of user and a lot of content. What I have > heard of the 0.7 network is that it has only a couple hundred users and very > little content. > > ps. There are many others like me who would like to try the 0.7 network, but > will not if there is no open net. > > > On Wednesday 23 August 2006 00:34, Ian Clarke wrote: > > On 22 Aug 2006, at 20:37, an ominous cow herd wrote: > > > You never experienced World War I, but I bet you know something > > > about it. > > > > Yes, but I wouldn't lecture those who had actually experienced it, > > and I think you will find Freenet 0.7 a somewhat more pleasant > > experience than the first world war. > > > > Ian. > > > > > > Ian Clarke: Co-Founder & Chief Scientist Revver, Inc. > > phone: 323.871.2828 | personal blog - http://locut.us/blog > ___ > Support mailing list > Support at freenetproject.org > http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support > Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support > Or mailto:support-request at freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe > -- 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/support/attachments/20060825/db1172ab/attachment.pgp>
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
On 8/24/06, urza9814 at gmail.com wrote: > "As I see it 0.7 relies on a bunch of people hooking up by sharing node > information. I may be a part of a freenet 0.7 network that consists of less > than 20 people. Out there somewhere else is another group of people, but > that group might be 100 people. Unless someone in the 2 groups makes a > connection, shares node information, the 2 groups don't talk to each other. > Making matters worse, the only connection they have is through that one > shared connection. There is no redundancy. Am I wrong in this assumption?" > > Yup...pretty much. That's why so many people refuse to switch to 0.7 > until there's a working opennet. I'm one of them. With an opennet, you > connect to anyone who's online, with multiple connections. Don't have > to trade references and you get a lot more connections with no effort. What will you do when freenet is made illegal and all the nodes are being harvested and blocked by a national firewall? Then the whole network fall apart, this can not happen with a darknet if it's done right. To take down a darknet you have to find participants and trick them to letting you in and then you can start finding out which hosts are part of it. It's a lot easier, cheaper and faster to take down an opennet than a darknet. > Not totally sure about the 'if the one node linking them dies you lose > all that data' part...seems like that's how it'd be handled, but I > haven't looked into 0.7 too much...because it has no opennet, so I > have no use for it. > > On 8/24/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com wrote: > > What about a pipe to the 0.5 freenet from 0.7 that allows access to the > > data? A 1-way street. 0.7 can add data to the 0.7 freenet, but can and to > > the 0.5 freenet. Only access the data. From what I have gathered, > > 'inserting' data into freenet is not a quick task. > > > > As I see it 0.7 relies on a bunch of people hooking up by sharing node > > information. I may be a part of a freenet 0.7 network that consists of less > > than 20 people. Out there somewhere else is another group of people, but > > that group might be 100 people. Unless someone in the 2 groups makes a > > connection, shares node information, the 2 groups don't talk to each other. > > Making matters worse, the only connection they have is through that one > > shared connection. There is no redundancy. Am I wrong in this assumption? > > > > > > > > > > >From: urza9814 at gmail.com > > >Reply-To: support at freenetproject.org > > >To: support at freenetproject.org > > >Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7 > > >Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 15:01:46 -0400 > > > > > >Freenet 0.5 is an opennet. You connect to any random node that happens > > >to be on. Freenet 0.7 doesn't have this yet. In 0.7, there is no main > > >network. There might be now, but the idea of the way it currently is > > >setup is to allow small groups to connect without connecting to > > >everyone else. Pretty much, there's nowhere for the content to go. > > >It'd be like trying to move everything on the internet to your local > > >LAN. > > >That, and it's just a complete program re-write I believe. It's quite > > >easy to 'convert' the content...open a page, save it, and then > > >re-upload it. The data stores work differently, and anyways the data > > >is distributed, so there wouldn't be any easy way to move it over. > > > > > >On 8/24/06, diddler4u at hotmail.com wrote: > > >>I've got a question for the developers. > > >> > > >>First a couple of comments. > > >> > > >>I've been watching the thread 0.5 vs 0.7, and although you want to move it > > >>somewhere else I welcome it. > > >> > > >>I brought up 0.7 about 5 days ago. It's been running ever since, I think. > > >>I > > >>don't monitor the PC that it is on, but I do see activity on the router > > >>port > > >>for the PC. I didn't much like the idea of asking people to let me access > > >>Freenet through them, but I did. I still think that is a good idea to gain > > >>initial access to Freenet, but after that it should go find other nodes > > >>and > > >>establish connections to them. I shouldn't have to always rely on the ones > > >>that were on IRC chat at the time I decided to set up the application. > > >> > > >>That said, here is by question. > > >> > > >> >From what I've seen here, there is a huge base of Freenet users on 0.5, > > >>and > > >>a large amount of content. What I fail to understand is why going to > > >>version > > >>0.7 all of that userbase and content was dropped. Why there was no way to > > >>connect to that Freenet and have access to the users and the content. I've > > >>tried to think of an example of some other internet application that made > > >>such a radical change that the entire existing base was dropped, and quite > > >>frankly I can't come up with one. I've seen application for my PC change > > >>so > > >>radically the data from the old application had to be converted before it > > >>would work, but a migration
[freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
This is a Type III anonymous message, sent to you by the Winston Smith Project Nefarion mixminion server at nefarion.winstonsmith.info. If you do not want to receive anonymous messages, please contact pbox- admin at winstonsmith.info. For more information about anonymity, see https://www.winstonsmith.info/pws or https://e-privacy.firenze.linux.it. -BEGIN TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE- Message-type: plaintext In <35af28770608241201n680631f1v158485f8cdc4073 at mail.gmail.com> urza9814 at gmail.com wrote: >Freenet 0.5 is an opennet. You connect to any random node that happens >to be on. Freenet 0.7 doesn't have this yet. In 0.7, there is no main >network. There might be now, but the idea of the way it currently is >setup is to allow small groups to connect without connecting to >everyone else. Pretty much, there's nowhere for the content to go. >It'd be like trying to move everything on the internet to your local >LAN. >That, and it's just a complete program re-write I believe. It's quite >easy to 'convert' the content...open a page, save it, and then >re-upload it. The data stores work differently, and anyways the data >is distributed, so there wouldn't be any easy way to move it over. > I don't know enough programming to do this, but I have an idea for a tool: Given that a user has an 0.5 node and a new 0.7 node import the data store. the tool would read the 0.5 store files, convert them to 0.7 format and then write them into the 0.7 store directories. Other than that, freesites will have to be saved in their entirety and then inserted into 0.7. Has FIW been fixed to work with 0.7? If it has, I'd be willing to help insert 0.5 content into 0.7 once I can get 0.7 working on windows98 I would also want to have enough refs to be able to guaranteed connectivity at all times. -END TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 19:37:56 -0400, Juiceman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip For those of you have never even tried to use 0.7 but are complaining about it: 1. You shouldn't argue until you at least try it. 2. It performs quite well IMO compared to 0.5 3. Almost every app from 0.5 works with 0.7 now (or there is an equivalent program available) 4. It is a complete re-write of almost all the code and uses a dramatically different data format so backwards compatibility is not possible. Move forward. :) To convince me you need not try for ready am I to migrate to 0.7 Like others recently posting however I am Windows 98 user not able to change OS. Tried have I various install methods to use. So far Failed have they all. Seeking guidance am I, to complete the migration with success. From others have I seen postings in their quest similar, yet ignored are they all. For help thank I you all. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
0) be sure you have Java version 1.5 or 1.6 (1.4 will/should work too) - type java -version in a console and watch the output 1) download these two files into a separate directory you've created forehand: - http://downloads.freenetproject.org/alpha/freenet-r10260-snapshot.jar - http://downloads.freenetproject.org/alpha/freenet-ext.jar 2) change to the directory they're in 3) rename freenet-r10260-snapshot.jar to freenet.jar 4) run java -cp freenet.jar;freenet-ext.jar;%CLASSPATH%;. freenet.node.Node 5) report problems :) On Thu, 24 Aug 2006 19:37:56 -0400, Juiceman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip For those of you have never even tried to use 0.7 but are complaining about it: 1. You shouldn't argue until you at least try it. 2. It performs quite well IMO compared to 0.5 3. Almost every app from 0.5 works with 0.7 now (or there is an equivalent program available) 4. It is a complete re-write of almost all the code and uses a dramatically different data format so backwards compatibility is not possible. Move forward. :) To convince me you need not try for ready am I to migrate to 0.7 Like others recently posting however I am Windows 98 user not able to change OS. Tried have I various install methods to use. So far Failed have they all. Seeking guidance am I, to complete the migration with success. From others have I seen postings in their quest similar, yet ignored are they all. For help thank I you all. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
From: Lars Juel Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: support@freenetproject.org To: support@freenetproject.org Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7 Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 01:54:16 +0200 On 8/25/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Lars Juel Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] to take down a darknet you have to find participants and trick them to letting you in and then you can start finding out which hosts are part of it. Wait - Wait - You don't have to be tricked into letting someone in. All they have to do is go to the IRC Chat and advertise they have freenet and want to exchange information with someone. Someone exchanges information with them and they in. Or are you saying everyone who joined was tricked into joining Freenet in the first place? For now that is true, they could just go on IRC and get connected but I'm talking about in the long run and people who are way too cautious to do something as silly as that. Anyway the IRC thing is just for bootstrapping the main network the devs are trying to create. People who want to have their own private darknets can easily do so too. I get it, freenet is not a worldwide community (openet), it's a bunch of private nets (darknets). Instead of growing to be huge like 0.5, 0.7 is inherently made to be small, unless you want to advertise on IRC. For now, my 'advertised on IRC' machine, is used for testing purposes only. Once things are running I remove all of my connections and build my own darknet of people I know and we use it as a private place to meet. _ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar - get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
Except that probably one of your friends knows someone on an other network, exchanges refs, and bang!, you've got a big worldwide network again.On 8/25/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Lars Juel Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED]Reply-To: support@freenetproject.org To: support@freenetproject.orgSubject: Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 01:54:16 +0200On 8/25/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From: Lars Juel Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] to take down a darknet you have to find participants and trick them to letting you in and then you can start finding out which hosts are part of it. Wait - Wait - You don't have to be tricked into letting someone in. Alltheyhave to do is go to the IRC Chat and advertise they have freenet and wanttoexchange information with someone. Someone exchanges information with them and they in. Or are you saying everyone who joined was tricked intojoiningFreenet in the first place?For now that is true, they could just go on IRC and get connected but I'm talking about in the long run and people who are way too cautiousto do something as silly as that. Anyway the IRC thing is just forbootstrapping the main network the devs are trying to create. People who want to have their own private darknets can easily do so too.I get it, freenet is not a worldwide community (openet), it's a bunch ofprivate nets (darknets). Instead of growing to be huge like 0.5, 0.7 isinherently made to be small, unless you want to advertise on IRC. For now,my 'advertised on IRC' machine, is used for testing purposes only. Oncethings are running I remove all of my connections and build my own darknet of people I know and we use it as a private place to meet._FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar - get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/___Support mailing listSupport@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.supportUnsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
Except that probably one of your friends knows someone on an other network, exchanges refs, and bang!, you've got a big worldwide network again. Or one of them goes into an IRC chat and exchanges the information and bang you're all busted. _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
No, only he is busted.On 8/25/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:Except that probably one of your friends knows someone on an other network, exchanges refs, and bang!, you've got a big worldwide network again.Or one of them goes into an IRC chat and exchanges the information and bangyou're all busted._ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE!http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ ___Support mailing listSupport@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.supportUnsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/supportOr mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
No, only he is busted. How do you figure that? Doesn't he have connections that canthen be traced and then the connections of those traced? _ Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.com/ ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Migration path, please! (Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0, 5 and 0, 7
Juiceman wrote: With 10 connections, the data that could intercepted by one attacker is roughly 10%. The problem is the attacker doesn't know how many connections you have, so you could just be passing on data from any number of connections you have. It's currently trivialy easy to find out if a request of a connected peer was forwarded by that peer or if it was a local request from that peer because local requests aren't stored in the datastore/-cache. (http://wiki.freenetproject.org/FreenetZeroPointSevenSecurity, search for the headline "Datastore") Thus you only have to probe the datastore of the requesting peer after sending the data to it and can find out if it was forwarded or originated there. In my opinion this isn't really acceptable on either a dark- or opennet (perhaps on a true darknet but that doesn't exist right now) but it certainly would cause havoc on an opennet. ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
It should not be possible to trace them easily. Of course, if his PC gets captured, that's possible.On 8/25/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No, only he is busted.How do you figure that? Doesn't he have connections that canthen be tracedand then the connections of those traced?_ Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!http://search.msn.com/___Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.orghttp://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.supportUnsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/supportOr mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
It should not be possible to trace them easily. Of course, if his PC gets captured, that's possible. If the person was busted their computer would be captured. I guess the only safe way is to run freenet from inside an encrypted (truecrypt or the like) partition or container and just hope freenet doesn't write information outside that container, no matter what the OS. _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
On 8/25/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It should not be possible to trace them easily. Of course, if his PC gets captured, that's possible. If the person was busted their computer would be captured. I guess the only safe way is to run freenet from inside an encrypted (truecrypt or the like) partition or container and just hope freenet doesn't write information outside that container, no matter what the OS. I'm confused... is this supposed to be an argument in favor of 0.5??? Evan ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
Doesn't have anything to do with 0.5 as far as I can tell. Except that in 0.5 you don't have to capture PCs to capture people on the network, in 0.7 you do, making it quite a bit more secure. On 8/25/06, Evan Daniel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 8/25/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It should not be possible to trace them easily. Of course, if his PC gets captured, that's possible. If the person was busted their computer would be captured. I guess the only safe way is to run freenet from inside an encrypted (truecrypt or the like) partition or container and just hope freenet doesn't write information outside that container, no matter what the OS.I'm confused... is this supposed to be an argument in favor of 0.5???Evan___Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.orghttp://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.supportUnsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/supportOr mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?subject=unsubscribe ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
From: Evan Daniel [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], support@freenetproject.org To: support@freenetproject.org Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7 Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 12:55:31 -0400 On 8/25/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It should not be possible to trace them easily. Of course, if his PC gets captured, that's possible. If the person was busted their computer would be captured. I guess the only safe way is to run freenet from inside an encrypted (truecrypt or the like) partition or container and just hope freenet doesn't write information outside that container, no matter what the OS. I'm confused... is this supposed to be an argument in favor of 0.5??? Evan No it's a discussion about security. Sounds like there are security issues in either version. It's just a matter of which security limitations you are wanting to accept. _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
It has around 600 users judging from recent estimates, a fair amount of content, and a lot of frost chatter. The stable branch was updated fairly regularly; the purpose of having a separate stable network was so we could test disruptive network changes. We may in future (after we are out of 0.7 alpha) test changes on the testnet, but right now we develop stuff in SVN, get people to test it from the testing-latest jar, and then commit a version bump and deploy the new jar generally. On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 08:06:51PM -0700, an ominous cow herd wrote: Thank you for the reply. I was hoping that you might actually answer the other part of the message The past Freenet had two branches, the stable and unstable. The unstable branch was the one where active coding was performed. The stable branch did not get updated often if at all. My question, which has yet to be answered, is why did the Freenet project break with the previous release model and start directing new users to the unstable alpha 0.7 release? When I talk of stable and unstable, I'm referring to the the code. As we can see, the 0.7 network is still undergoing a lot of changes with several critical bug fixes. The 0.5 network didn't have many changes near the end. The 0.5 network has thousands of user and a lot of content. What I have heard of the 0.7 network is that it has only a couple hundred users and very little content. ps. There are many others like me who would like to try the 0.7 network, but will not if there is no open net. On Wednesday 23 August 2006 00:34, Ian Clarke wrote: On 22 Aug 2006, at 20:37, an ominous cow herd wrote: You never experienced World War I, but I bet you know something about it. Yes, but I wouldn't lecture those who had actually experienced it, and I think you will find Freenet 0.7 a somewhat more pleasant experience than the first world war. Ian. Ian Clarke: Co-Founder Chief Scientist Revver, Inc. phone: 323.871.2828 | personal blog - http://locut.us/blog ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. signature.asc Description: Digital signature ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
1. This is nonsense. A darknet doesn't have to be small. A WASTE darknet has to be small; a Freenet 0.7 darknet can be large, because your friends connect to their friends who connect to their friends; you can get a lot of nodes in relatively few hops. There are no other darknet programs out there in the sense of Freenet 0.7's darknet: It is radically different to WASTE. It is a *globally scalable* darknet, not a single cell darknet where everyone knows everyone else directly. 2. It is already actively being planned. The EFF, the ACLU and the FFII are swamped. Freenet is probably illegal today under passed legislation, and in any case MY passion for Freenet has always been based on using it in hostile regimes (China blocks freenet 0.5 based on session bytes). One side effect of the (impossibly broad) IPRED2 directive going through in the EU might be making Freenet illegal (along making patent infringement a criminal offence, the world's first 'incitement to IP violation' law and lots of other terrible things). Hopefully this will be defeated, but they'll be back with something more specifically against filesharing (like the French DADVSI law) in a few years. On Thu, Aug 24, 2006 at 06:33:58PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: True, but the opennet isn't illegal. I'm not in any way saying the darknet shouldn't be added...it's a great feature...but freenet has always been an opennet, and that should be done first. People who want a darknet are probably already using other programs like Waste. If they start thinking about making the opennet form of freenet illegal, we'll know long before it happens. And there will be plenty of people (EFF, ACLU, etc) fighting it. I realize there are other countries where they can't use an opennet, but like I said, there are other darknet programs out there. That's not what freenet is. On 8/24/06, Lars Juel Nielsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 8/24/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As I see it 0.7 relies on a bunch of people hooking up by sharing node information. I may be a part of a freenet 0.7 network that consists of less than 20 people. Out there somewhere else is another group of people, but that group might be 100 people. Unless someone in the 2 groups makes a connection, shares node information, the 2 groups don't talk to each other. Making matters worse, the only connection they have is through that one shared connection. There is no redundancy. Am I wrong in this assumption? Yup...pretty much. That's why so many people refuse to switch to 0.7 until there's a working opennet. I'm one of them. With an opennet, you connect to anyone who's online, with multiple connections. Don't have to trade references and you get a lot more connections with no effort. What will you do when freenet is made illegal and all the nodes are being harvested and blocked by a national firewall? Then the whole network fall apart, this can not happen with a darknet if it's done right. To take down a darknet you have to find participants and trick them to letting you in and then you can start finding out which hosts are part of it. It's a lot easier, cheaper and faster to take down an opennet than a darknet. Not totally sure about the 'if the one node linking them dies you lose all that data' part...seems like that's how it'd be handled, but I haven't looked into 0.7 too much...because it has no opennet, so I have no use for it. On 8/24/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What about a pipe to the 0.5 freenet from 0.7 that allows access to the data? A 1-way street. 0.7 can add data to the 0.7 freenet, but can and to the 0.5 freenet. Only access the data. From what I have gathered, 'inserting' data into freenet is not a quick task. As I see it 0.7 relies on a bunch of people hooking up by sharing node information. I may be a part of a freenet 0.7 network that consists of less than 20 people. Out there somewhere else is another group of people, but that group might be 100 people. Unless someone in the 2 groups makes a connection, shares node information, the 2 groups don't talk to each other. Making matters worse, the only connection they have is through that one shared connection. There is no redundancy. Am I wrong in this assumption? From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: support@freenetproject.org To: support@freenetproject.org Subject: Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7 Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 15:01:46 -0400 Freenet 0.5 is an opennet. You connect to any random node that happens to be on. Freenet 0.7 doesn't have this yet. In 0.7, there is no main network. There might be now, but the idea of the way it currently is setup is to allow small groups to connect without connecting to everyone else. Pretty much, there's nowhere for the content to go. It'd be like trying to move everything on the internet to your
Re: [freenet-support] Freenet 0,5 and 0,7
Thank you for the reply. I'm not looking to be argumentative, and acknowledge Ian's request to take this to a different board, but must ask why the Freenet group decide to direct new users to the new alpha 0.7 network instead of the established 0.5 network before there was an open net? Especially since the 0.7 network is undergoing many changes with several critical bug fixes. I also hope you understand that there is a large number of dedicated users on the 0.5 network that would like to try the new network, but won't if there is no open net. On Thursday 24 August 2006 17:26, Matthew Toseland wrote: It has around 600 users judging from recent estimates, a fair amount of content, and a lot of frost chatter. The stable branch was updated fairly regularly; the purpose of having a separate stable network was so we could test disruptive network changes. We may in future (after we are out of 0.7 alpha) test changes on the testnet, but right now we develop stuff in SVN, get people to test it from the testing-latest jar, and then commit a version bump and deploy the new jar generally. On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 08:06:51PM -0700, an ominous cow herd wrote: Thank you for the reply. I was hoping that you might actually answer the other part of the message The past Freenet had two branches, the stable and unstable. The unstable branch was the one where active coding was performed. The stable branch did not get updated often if at all. My question, which has yet to be answered, is why did the Freenet project break with the previous release model and start directing new users to the unstable alpha 0.7 release? When I talk of stable and unstable, I'm referring to the the code. As we can see, the 0.7 network is still undergoing a lot of changes with several critical bug fixes. The 0.5 network didn't have many changes near the end. The 0.5 network has thousands of user and a lot of content. What I have heard of the 0.7 network is that it has only a couple hundred users and very little content. ps. There are many others like me who would like to try the 0.7 network, but will not if there is no open net. On Wednesday 23 August 2006 00:34, Ian Clarke wrote: On 22 Aug 2006, at 20:37, an ominous cow herd wrote: You never experienced World War I, but I bet you know something about it. Yes, but I wouldn't lecture those who had actually experienced it, and I think you will find Freenet 0.7 a somewhat more pleasant experience than the first world war. Ian. Ian Clarke: Co-Founder Chief Scientist Revver, Inc. phone: 323.871.2828 | personal blog - http://locut.us/blog ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Support mailing list Support@freenetproject.org http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
