On Mon, May 24, 2004 at 11:32:50AM +0000, Wayne McDougall wrote:
> Phillip Hutchings <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > One thing that I can think of is limiting the size of incoming files 
> > not requested by the node directly - stop splitfiles and things going 
> > through. I'm more interested in the information, not movies, but I 
> > can't think of a tidy way to implement this in a few minutes. I know 
> > it's not really in line with the freenet ideal, and also it could 
> > compromise privacy, but it's a thought.
> So you not only don't want to store large files in your data store - 
> you don't want to relay them either? It should be easy enough to stop such 
> files being stored in your data store - according to freenet.ini it doesn't 
> store files larger than 1/100th of the size of your datastore, in your 
> datastore. That 1/100 calculation would be easy to find and tweak so you don't 
> store files of 1 Mb (and these days all the large files I see are in chunks of 
> 1,026 Kb). The question is whether you can identify whether incoming data is 
> part of an incoming 1 Mb message bfore you accept it. My guess, only a guess, 
> is yes.

This is true.
> I would think that "information" as opposed to files would normally be under 1 
> Mb.

ZIP manifest freesites, the Diebold files, even some "informative"
> For my part I'd like to contribute as much bandwidth to Freenet as a whole, but 
> when in a capped triage situation I certainly understand wanting to prioritise 
> traffic.

NGR will take into account your transfer rate when deciding whether to
route a request to you. Hopefully you'd get fewer requests for big
Matthew J Toseland - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/
ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Support mailing list
Unsubscribe at http://dodo.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support

Reply via email to