-BEGIN TYPE III ANONYMOUS MESSAGE-
Message-type: plaintext
In [EMAIL PROTECTED] Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 07:52:44PM +0200, Julien Cornuwel wrote:
Matthew Toseland a ?crit :
On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 06:36:53PM +0200, Julien Cornuwel wrote:
As
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 10:55:12AM +0100, Ian Clarke wrote:
On 19 Sep 2005, at 16:54, Matthew Toseland wrote:
It is IMHO strategically vital that we can test the network as a pure
darknet. We will need an opennet as well, because we need to have
something for people to download from
On 20 Sep 2005, at 10:56, Matthew Toseland wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 10:55:12AM +0100, Ian Clarke wrote:
On 19 Sep 2005, at 16:54, Matthew Toseland wrote:
It is IMHO strategically vital that we can test the network as a
pure
darknet. We will need an opennet as well, because we need to
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 11:12:40AM +0100, Ian Clarke wrote:
On 20 Sep 2005, at 10:56, Matthew Toseland wrote:
Which reduces globally scalable darknet to clusters of dark nodes
hanging off the opennet.
Well, if that would truly be the topology then the alternative is
clusters of isolated
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 12:58:44PM +0100, Ian Clarke wrote:
On 20 Sep 2005, at 11:33, Matthew Toseland wrote:
Well, if that would truly be the topology then the alternative is
clusters of isolated dark nodes, which is worse?
There would be no real reason to grow the darknet, that's the
On 20 Sep 2005, at 14:08, Matthew Toseland wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 12:58:44PM +0100, Ian Clarke wrote:
On 20 Sep 2005, at 11:33, Matthew Toseland wrote:
Well, if that would truly be the topology then the alternative is
clusters of isolated dark nodes, which is worse?
There would be no
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 02:55:55PM +0100, Ian Clarke wrote:
On 20 Sep 2005, at 14:08, Matthew Toseland wrote:
On Tue, Sep 20, 2005 at 12:58:44PM +0100, Ian Clarke wrote:
On 20 Sep 2005, at 11:33, Matthew Toseland wrote:
Well, if that would truly be the topology then the alternative is
On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 07:52:44PM +0200, Julien Cornuwel wrote:
Matthew Toseland a ?crit :
On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 06:36:53PM +0200, Julien Cornuwel wrote:
As far as the above goes, please read the responses to the other post.
I did. So you confirm my understanding ? 99% of current
Matthew Toseland a écrit :
My understanding is that the french crypto regulations were abandoned
some time ago.
That law is just a project (no decree yet). For the moment, we're still
limited to 128b.
Make your own darknet. :)
Then come to Bristol, take me out for a pizza, and I'll connect
On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 07:37:27PM +0200, Julien Cornuwel wrote:
Matthew Toseland a ?crit :
My understanding is that the french crypto regulations were abandoned
some time ago.
That law is just a project (no decree yet). For the moment, we're still
limited to 128b.
That's bizarre. Nobody
On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 06:36:53PM +0200, Julien Cornuwel wrote:
Following the post named Hypothetical question, I'd like to expose you
a practical case : the French community. Stop me when I'm wrong.
We all know each others only by Freenet and it is said that it isn't
enough to form a
Matthew Toseland a écrit :
On Sat, Sep 17, 2005 at 06:36:53PM +0200, Julien Cornuwel wrote:
Following the post named Hypothetical question, I'd like to expose you
a practical case : the French community. Stop me when I'm wrong.
We all know each others only by Freenet and it is said that it
12 matches
Mail list logo
