Re: Gnutella 3

> So from my point of view, the question isn't what features we should add
> to Gnutella, or what P2P network we should "rebrand" as Gnutella 3; the
> question is whether we can imagine a very simple, very flexible P2P
> architecture that incorporates the lessons from the first ten years of
> Gnutella and provides a platform on which to build cool P2P services for
> the next ten years.
>   
Well put, and with that I can agree.

As for the complexity of Gnutella overall, the main problem as I see it 
is with the documentation or rather the lack thereof. We started the 0.6 
documentation a while ago and then things dwindled down due to various 
reasons, leaving it unfinished. Greg and his team at LimeWire did try to 
pick things up where others left and built a fairly good documentation 
(kudos to them!), but in my humble opinion it's a bit too 
LimeWire-centric, with features that are not always incorporated or 
compatible with other clients (Raphael spent ages figuring their DHT 
out). I think that'd be the first thing to address. Once it's there, 
people will have a better idea of how things work and give a better 
input of why or how things should be simplified, improved, removed, etc.

Just my 2 cents :)

-- Mike