On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 11:09:53PM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Nobody expects opennet to be implemented in the very near future, > however in my opinion, there is an adequate basis upon which to > implement an opennet that retains a small world network topology. > > However, getting back to the original point of this thread, I say > again, for darknet to succeed, we need to make it as easy as possible > for people to establish connections. That means implementing FCP > support for connection management.
That is not the only way to make it easy to establish connections. Do you have any other concrete proposals? I did hope to be able to distribute invitation files, which would be a once-only invite allowing you to connect even if you don't have a node yet. The problem is that if both parties are NATted (and they usually are), this won't work because they need to know each others' IP addresses. So I'm not sure how we can make it easy to connect. My original objection stands to FCP connection management: 99% of the usage of FCP connection management will be for grotesque hacks which produce bogus opennets without the right topology. The remaining 1% will be for fproxy replacements and the like. But if you have any specific examples of things that you could do other than automated connection to random published peers, I am willing to listen to that. > > Ian. -- Matthew J Toseland - toad at amphibian.dyndns.org Freenet Project Official Codemonkey - http://freenetproject.org/ ICTHUS - Nothing is impossible. Our Boss says so. -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Digital signature URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/tech/attachments/20060530/b93ebdbb/attachment.pgp>
