Re: Re: Implementing a Gnutella-structured network only with basic HTTP possible?Date: Wed, 24 Feb 2010 09:08:15 +0000 (UTC)Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2010 12:55:15 +0000 (UTC)

>
>
> > i think there is already a library, which protocol we could brand to
> > gnutella 3:
> >
> Well, you lost my vote just there ;-)
>
> -- Mike
>
> (A)
>
   We can abandon
> :the network and start from scratch -
>
(B)

>   persuading them to move to another network, that seems like a desparate
> measure.
>
(C)

>   Or we can try to
> :plan a gradual transition from the current network to a simpler, more
> :maintainable one, barriers to entry.with lower
>

gnutella 3 could be the DHT of offload.sf.net , yes it would be option B,
you mentioned.
it is trivial,that guntella 3 is not gunutella.
why starting from scratch if a dht is already working? offload has all that
what you requested, dht, http, bootstrappers build in, hashlinks, cache,
etc. look at the kibrary first, approve it, make it better, release it as
gnutella 3.
as a library, as the encryption part is nothing for newbies, here it needs
young developers to learn, though. but a a library like libtorrent.sf.net it
would be great..

so we need to discuss the features of this protocol, or make a plan to write
a new one from scratch. i do not believe in a hybrid, or simplified one. so
gnutella 3 will be something new, something we learned from last years.
gnutella is not dead because the young are missing, but because the
establishment is done.

creating liboffload as gnutella 3 would be an approach, where we follow in
common the ideas of the there founded ideas due to the analysis of all other
networks before...


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]