Re: [Mldonkey-users] Overnet support - patch number 1

[MLdonkey]

>  That's it. Freenet has the idea but is slow, and will always be as all it is
>  basically a chain of proxies. If you don't need so much "anonymity", you
>  don't have to sacrifize so much bandwidth.

Yes, in fact, anonimity could become important in the future. However,
I've thought about another idea of freenet, ie the fact that people
don't know which files they are hosting. A cache could be implemented
in mldonkey, that would randomly download chunks from the network (not
complete files) and share them. This would increase availability,
without compromising users (they can't be taken as responsible, since
they don't know which files are on their disk). For uploaders, they
could simply fill their cache with the chunks of the file they want to
release, so that the file would not be seen as complete on their disk,
since it would be splitted in small pieces. Just some thoughts...


>  On this subjet, there's one thing in overnet that I don't think we need in
>  mldonkey-overnet : ability to browse users... 

The ability to browse users could in fact be very useful for us. We
are planning to build an overlay network over edonkey+overnet, that
would be based on some special servers: these servers would browse all
clients, and then act as edonkey servers, providing services such as
keyword searches or source searches. These servers would only be
available for mldonkey clients, so that they would not suffer from
problems with other clients (udp stuff, etc). Moreover, since the
clients they browse will not stay connected, they will be able to
display more files than edonkey servers. Finally, since both edonkey
and overnet clients can be browsed, both of them will appear in the 
replies of these servers. Of course, this can only work if all clients
accept to be browsed. 

>  But I'm looking forward to
>  implementing availibility from overnet (in general, what is the status of
>  avaibility in mldonkey, for example regarding the edonkey protocol ?), and
>  perhaps the "force filter" search option that we discussed earlier.

Sorry, I missed this discussion. But there is already a filter_search
option (or something like that) used to post-filter replies to search
to guaranty they match the request.

- MLDonkey