On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 11:04 AM, Alex Pyattaev<alex.pyatt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> He has stated that the network does not allow "P2P applications" running
>> Freenet
>> as pure darknet will technically be "F2F", now we can start arguing
>> whether F2F
>> is a subset of P2P or a distinctly different thing. But if we accept that
>> F2F
>> and P2P are different, then people who haven't enabled Opennet are
>> actually not
>> violating that particular network's guidelines.
> Actually, darknet peers inside LAN are not violating ToS, because the
> inside-network traffic is not an issue. The actual problem is that a bunch
> of p2p users seeding and leeching from internet can consume every possible
> bit of channel available on the ISP's connection.  That's why they are
> illegal. The traffic for each user is virtually unlimited, but if you do the
> math, you will see that without p2p you just can not consume even 2 mbit/s
> channel, and we provide 10 mbit/s. Thus, when the user is downloading
> something big from time to time - it works just nice. But when he fills up
> at list 5 mbit/s with 24/7 p2p exchange the traffic utilization is much
> bigger than it should be. I have proposed to the managers that we allow p2p
> for extra charge (or with limited QoS), but they have decided that it will
> not work out (all that piracy stuff is still an issue).
> Online gamers are not always client-server. I have stated spring as a
> typical random-server udp-based game (ta-spring.com), the Company Of heroes
> also works similarily - host is a random node, and all nodes are
> interconnected.
> Indeed, 24x7 active connections can be suspicious, so I hope you will
> counter this problem so that I don't bother setting up filter. I suggest
> breaking every single connection that lasts for more than 1 hour, if it is
> not unique, and then reconnecting after random delay.
> PS: fuck bosses, I run freenet node myself=)

Last I checked, p2p wasn't "illegal" in any place I know of :)

This sounds to me like you really just need better QoS for your users,
not to block P2P.  It's relatively easy to allocate bandwidth such
that everyone gets their fair share, and those that use it *less* get
priority over the short term.  That means that p2p users can use up
any excess bandwidth, but if someone else is just trying to browse the
web it will go quickly.  Piracy is not the point of Freenet; please
don't assume anyone running Freenet is a pirate.  You should consult a
lawyer about your liability for piracy -- I suspect, however, that you
aren't liable until you are notified of a *specific* problem.

Also, have you tried just asking your users to set reasonable
bandwidth limits?  All p2p apps I know of, including Freenet, provide
bandwidth limiting controls.  Perhaps you should simply inform your
users of the situation and what you consider a reasonable bw limit for
p2p apps.

Evan Daniel
Support mailing list
Unsubscribe at http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/support
Or mailto:support-requ...@freenetproject.org?subject=unsubscribe

Reply via email to