On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 03:35:16PM -0800, Tyler Riddle wrote: > Hi Gordan, > > Your wasting your time posting to this list. The > developers actively ignore it. If you are brave enough > ask your questions on the devl mailing list but you > run a very large risk of getting yelled at. The only > reason I am on this list at all is because unsubscribe > is currently broken. I doubt anyone else is receving > these emails. Firstly, there is such a thing as procmail. Secondly, if you can't unsubscribe it is probably your own fault. Thirdly, I don't have admin access to this list, but I have forwarded it to [EMAIL PROTECTED], who does, AS IT SAYS AT THE BOTTOM OF http://hawk.freenetproject.org:8080/mailman/listinfo/tech/ > --- Gordan Bobic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, I've got a few questions about the current fred > > implementation. > > > > I've heard the issue raised recently about a FAQ > > stating that the > > communication between the Freenet nodes is not > > encrypted. Is this true? Other > > documentation implies that all communication between > > individual nodes occurs > > over encrypted connections. I suspect the FAQ in > > question is wrong, but I'm > > curious to find out for sure. > > > > The next question is regarding the network setup > > used for Freenet. Can the > > current node implementation deal with living on > > multiple IP addresses at the > > same time? If Fred is running on a multi-homed > > system, load balanced over > > multiple networks, with the relevant ports forwarded > > from the central hub to > > the actual node (single interface on fred host, with > > multiple interfaces > > port-forwarded to it from the hub), will this work > > as expected? Or is it > > likely to break things? I have briefly tried it, and > > it looks like it works, > > with the traffic eventually distributing over all > > available connections. > > > > I am concerned, however, that this could potentially > > result in the node trying > > to talk to itself on it's different interfaces? Or > > is it likely to break > > other things, (security or anonymity for example). > > What happens if the node > > is given a "name" for itself that resolves to > > multiple IP addresses (matching > > with the above mentioned multiple parallel network > > paths)? Will this cause > > any problems? > > > > Thirdly, what are the implications of running > > multiple nodes on the same IP > > address(es), on different ports? Will this work as > > expected? Will it work at > > all? Will it break all of the nodes sharing the > > address(es)? > > > > Regards. > > > > Gordan > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Tech mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech > > > ===== > AIM:rllybites Y! Messenger:triddle_1999 > > __________________________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. > http://mailplus.yahoo.com > > _______________________________________________ > Tech mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://hawk.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tech >
-- Matthew Toseland [EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] Full time freenet hacker. http://freenetproject.org/ Freenet Distribution Node (temporary) at ICTHUS.
msg01054/pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature
