Re: Re: OOB Reply Delivery Protocol v3
"Ravinder Singh" <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.network.gnutella.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
Hi guys,
I just came across ur discussion abt ppl who are already into a
development of a Gnutella client for mobile... or wish to develop one, i
just wanna make u guys know... that i'm also working on a similar project...
and its bascialy a college level project..i got no plans to release it
officially as its not going to be n full fledged implementation of gnutella
specification. Although if anyone would like to know more abt this... ur
most welcome...
Regards,
Ravii
On 2/16/07, Arne Babenhauserheide <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> El Jueves, 15 de Febrero de 2007 22:55, [email protected]<Raphael_Manfredi%40pobox.com>escribió:
> > Honnestly, given the formidable effort it represents to understand the
> > Gnutella protocol and its myriad of extensions, plus the cost of
> > implementing and testing, do you really believe new clients can become
> > functionnal any time soon?
>
> I don't think they will have full functionality very soon, but I am quite
> certain that they will be useable soon, in their own special use case.
>
> One for example is being created for mobile phones.
>
> And I assume there will always be new Gnutella clients using new
> programming
> languages or toolkits, and they have it far easier than the pioneers,
> because
> they can look at the work done by other free software clients and learn
> from
> it.
>
> That's one of the strengths of Gnutella, I think.
>
> For examples, just think GiFT and Shareaza.
> They aren't the best implementations, but they are working
> implementations,
> and people use them, and Shareaza is the best example that new people can
> have quite disrupting ideas :)
> And GiFT shows, that new people can provide really new things, even though
>
> they sadly use a multi-network approach.
>
> Bets wishes,
> Arne Babenhauserheide
> PS: I don't use Shareaza, but its community seems to be quite driving.
> Still I
> think the concept of multiple networks for the same purpose (tag based
> searching) quite flawed. (Longer explanation in the Phex Wiki:
>
> http://wiki.phex.org/Talk:Roadmap#Why_we_don.27t_want_multiple_p2p-networks
> It's my work, and everyone on this list is free to use it as long as I get
>
> attribution. )
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]