On Tue, 18 Apr 2000, Michael Wiktowy wrote: > > From: Oskar Sandberg <md98-osa at nada.kth.se> > > To: freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net > > Date: Tue, 18 Apr 2000 03:02:26 +0200 > > Subject: [Freenet-dev] build 121 > > Reply-To: freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net > > > > I updated the node with the transient option, which will keep it from ever > > setting the "DataSource" to point to itself. Transient makes for a one way > > proxy node, so that someone behind a shifting connection can run a node but > > not > > get any references stuck to it. I know the thing about "taking and not > > giving", > > but bad references from people behind modems running local nodes when they > > insert is just as bad. > > What is the difference between this transient type of node and a client > accessing someone elses node directly? Is the transient node -> regular node > traffic any more obfuscated than client -> > regular node traffic (for the purposes of making source side inserts and > requests look like the regular routing)? > > What are the benefits (to the user or the freenet) of running one of these > nodes rather than just running a client? It seems to me that the rest of the > freenet cannot access anything that may > be cached in the transient's store. That means that anything accessed locally > by a client from the transient node was either put there by the clients > previous request or insert.
Actually, adding the functionality to the node was just two lines, I really wrote it in for the sake of the Java client, which uses the same core as the node. Previously the client would set the DataSource to the address it was sending too, which was just weird because that meant nodes kept getting references to themselves in their DataStores. Of course, since the local node, tansient or not, receives DataSources from on DataReplies, it will at least start learning where to send requests, saving you one or two jumps possibly. > It seems to me that this is introducing a difference between the first hop > requests and inserts from traffic sniffers to pick up on. Can't be avoided. > > I'm wondering a little about the writing and reading of the > > StandardDataStore. > > During my testing tonight, the DataStore seemed cleared between every > > execution > > even after the times I had seen the "Writing DataStore to disk" message. Can > > someone test that it is actually working (I must sleep). > > I noticed odd storage behaviour in my newly created node also. > Here is some output from the store. <snip> Will you debug this Bill (or whoever last worked on it), as it doesn't seem it is working right. > > _______________________________________________ > Freenet-dev mailing list > Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev -- Oskar Sandberg md98-osa at nada.kth.se #!/bin/perl -sp0777i<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<j]dsj $/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1 lK[d2%Sa2/d0$^Ixp"|dc`;s/\W//g;$_=pack('H*',/((..)*)$/) _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
