On 8/27/06, Nicholas Sturm [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Even freenet has a habit of talking about places without providing a
pointer. Is that a built-in property of most freetnet folks. I.e., if I
know what I'm talking about then everyone knows about it?
On 8/24/06, urza9814 at gmail.com wrote:
> opennets are only bad in certain circumstances. The USA is not yet one
> of them. With a darknet, it may be harder to get into the network, but
> once your in it's a LOT easier to identify who is sharing and
> inserting what files. So it could be argued
On 8/24/06, 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
On 8/24/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So by running 0.7 in default mode I'm running in darknet? Or is there
another piece of the freenet puzzle I need to discover?
It is a darknet because unless you give out your ref to someone
(like currently on IRC but that will change
On 8/24/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [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
On 8/24/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
opennets are only bad in certain circumstances. The USA is not yet one
of them. With a darknet, it may be harder to get into the network, but
once your in it's a LOT easier to identify who is sharing and
inserting what files. So it could be
On 7/18/06, Ken Snider wrote:
> I've determined that my SoHo router can't keep up with the UDP traffic
> freenet produces, and have decided to move my node to somewhere with better
> connectivity. This will necessitate both an IP change, and a host change
> (i.e., different system).
>
> Further,
On 7/18/06, Ken Snider [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've determined that my SoHo router can't keep up with the UDP traffic
freenet produces, and have decided to move my node to somewhere with better
connectivity. This will necessitate both an IP change, and a host change
(i.e., different system).
On 7/4/06, freenet at altweb.nl wrote:
> Hi,
>
> My node is up again... but it gives info about the following:
>
> INFO | jvm 1| 2006/07/04 20:57:27 | Does not verify (CHK block
> 2543)
> INFO | jvm 1| 2006/07/04 20:57:43 | Does not verify (CHK block
> 3615)
>
> What could that be?
>
On 7/4/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
My node is up again... but it gives info about the following:
INFO | jvm 1| 2006/07/04 20:57:27 | Does not verify (CHK block
2543)
INFO | jvm 1| 2006/07/04 20:57:43 | Does not verify (CHK block
3615)
What could that be?
On 6/28/06, Roy D. Hutchinson CAC II wrote:
>
>
>
> I am new to Freenet, and IRC. I have installed and opend, logged on to IRC
> channel #freenet. I asked for help and for the last 30 minutes no one has
> been on line. Is there another way to get a Key. The other question I have
> is where do I
On 6/28/06, Roy D. Hutchinson CAC II [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am new to Freenet, and IRC. I have installed and opend, logged on to IRC
channel #freenet. I asked for help and for the last 30 minutes no one has
been on line. Is there another way to get a Key. The other question I have
is
On 6/20/06, Matthew Toseland wrote:
> Fine, can somebody else have a look?
>
> On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 07:39:20PM +0200, patou22 wrote:
> > I didn't make a list. I won't go and make a list.
> > So, i didn't remove registry key. For the moment freenet is desactivate.
> >
> > Matthew Toseland a
Couldn't we have the node immediately check for the revocation key
when it finds a new update and wait for the revocation key check to
return before displaying the update button? Admittedly there would be
a tiny chance that the key could be blown in between when the
revocation was checked for and
Couldn't we have the node immediately check for the revocation key
when it finds a new update and wait for the revocation key check to
return before displaying the update button? Admittedly there would be
a tiny chance that the key could be blown in between when the
revocation was checked for
On 6/20/06, Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Fine, can somebody else have a look?
On Tue, Jun 20, 2006 at 07:39:20PM +0200, patou22 wrote:
I didn't make a list. I won't go and make a list.
So, i didn't remove registry key. For the moment freenet is desactivate.
Matthew Toseland a
On 6/13/06, The Beal [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So what, exactly, should I be backing up to prevent this from happening?
-freenet.ini
-wrapper.conf
Anything else?
I would also suggest node-port# file and peers-port# file
--
I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the
Ah, I see. Thanks for the info.
On 6/12/06, Volodya wrote:
> > Why is this different between Windows and Linux?
>
> In most shells in GNU/Linux ';' means a separator between different commands,
> that are to
> be run consecutively.
>
> --
> Hi! I am a .SIG virus! Copy me to your SIG so that I
Ah, I see. Thanks for the info.
On 6/12/06, Volodya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why is this different between Windows and Linux?
In most shells in GNU/Linux ';' means a separator between different commands,
that are to
be run consecutively.
--
Hi! I am a .SIG virus! Copy me to your SIG so
On 6/10/06, Blue Raven wrote:
> I am having trouble getting Freenet 0.7 to run on my system. I am running
> SuSE 10.1 on a machine with an AMD Athlon 64 processor. I attempted to
> install the node manually since I couldn't seem to get the web-installer or
> self extracting JAR to work.
>
> I
On 6/5/06, / phred / wrote:
> OK, Freenet is making my windows box run way too hot. (3.0 AMD / 2G /XP Pro)
> Normally runs 94-98F, when I push really hard it gets up to 114-118F.
> Freenet puts me up at 125-129F!
> Slows everthing down to the point of unusability. So, I either have to turn
>
On 2/6/06, Ashton Vaz wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I recently installed Freenet Build 5106 on a Windows XP SP2 machine
> via the freenet installer. After doing so, Freenet worked well with one
> exception. It is a resource hog - both in terms of memory as well as
> processor time. I found this
On 2/6/06, Ashton Vaz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello,
I recently installed Freenet Build 5106 on a Windows XP SP2 machine
via the freenet installer. After doing so, Freenet worked well with one
exception. It is a resource hog - both in terms of memory as well as
processor time. I
On 12/13/05, Gan Uesli Starling wrote:
> I'm trying to get Freenet going on NetBSD and
> having problems. Am writing a howto as I go, so
> whatever my mistake is you should find it there.
>
> http://69.51.152.43/darknets/#GUS-3-4
>
> (That is a rough draft, served on my home PC. When
> it is done
On 12/13/05, Gan Uesli Starling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm trying to get Freenet going on NetBSD and
having problems. Am writing a howto as I go, so
whatever my mistake is you should find it there.
http://69.51.152.43/darknets/#GUS-3-4
(That is a rough draft, served on my home PC. When
On 11/15/05, Ladi Olaiya [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear Support Personnel -
I would like to create a private freenet within my organization that will
only be known only to the members of my organization only. I do not want to
be part of a larger Freenet.
Could you please let me know how to
Wasn't there an idea to have a separate encrypted user store with a
key that is only in ram? When a person turns off their node or
computer the user store is essentially unreadable and would be erased
on next start-up? Locally requested content would only be kept there.
On 9/22/05, Matthew
On 9/19/05, Bruce Hollihan [c] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello
I am a new user to freenet, and it seems like I followed all the
directions, but I can't get on freenet.
Here's some info:
Version Information
Node Version0.5
Protocol Version1.46
Build Number5012
Ouch. This
Thanks for the heads up
I ended up trashing that ancient version of freenet, and went for the
latest release instead.
I've started it up, and already things seem to be closer to a desired
outcome, so I'll be patient.
Also, I received this message, as seen below this line. Should I be
concerned
On 8/26/05, Dylan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
wanting to install freenet, but i can't seem to.. i can run the initial config
script, and that works, but when it runs it produces the following errors.
Please note I changed the script to run the command gij instead of java. the
error is the same,
I assume that at least some requests do work? How many open
connections are listed under advanced mode -- open connections ?
If some requests are working and you have open connections, then just
leaving you node running over time (days) will improve your routing
ability.
On 8/27/05, Spike
I assume that at least some requests do work? How many open
connections are listed under advanced mode -- open connections ?
If some requests are working and you have open connections, then just
leaving you node running over time (days) will improve your routing
ability.
On 8/27/05, Spike
The 52 is the number of other nodes that see your address as that one.
On 6/12/05, shaun [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
on the page
(http://127.0.0.1:/servlet/nodeinfo/internal/env),
where it lists Addresses Detected by the Network, it
lists:
IPv4: xxx.xxx.xxx.xxx 52
IPv4: 192.168.2.1
On Wed, 9 Mar 2005 13:29:23 +, Matthew Toseland
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Mar 09, 2005 at 01:01:51AM -0500, Juiceman wrote:
It may just be the sheer number of connections your computer has
simultaneously open. Try editing your freenet config file to reduce
the number
It may just be the sheer number of connections your computer has
simultaneously open. Try editing your freenet config file to reduce
the number of connections and see if that clears up your Bit torrent
and Emule issues. That won't help your Freenet speed any, but it may
let you run all three
ML = Mailing List
PM = Private Message
On Thu, 2 Dec 2004 00:27:05 -0500, Nicholas Sturm
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No flames here, but I did not understand the message and I don't
have the advantage of analyzing on the basis of other language
forms. I suspect it was the symbols that left me
101 - 136 of 136 matches
Mail list logo
