On Friday 21 August 2009 16:22:22 Evan Daniel wrote:
> 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.

Or give them a quota and charge for usage beyond that. Or throttle them after 

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

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