Yes I am referring to 0.7. No feature work will be done for 0.5.
On Thu, Jul 27, 2006 at 11:07:05AM +0200, Level 13 wrote: > That's not very encouraging. Perhaps there should be some flag > available to let other nodes know that one of them is just > "temporarily unavailable". Or maybe an option for a "3rd party" server > where the traffic requests would be rerouted - and the "temporarily > unavailable" answer given out (the "3rd party" router probably being > another (web?) server to which the DynDNS would point for a while). > > BTW, what do you guys mean by "people drop nodes" and "people can > see"? I thought the _system_ was automatically selecting the nodes? Or > are you referring to 0.7 only? -- 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 [email protected] http://news.gmane.org/gmane.network.freenet.support Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support Or mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
