Latency mischaracterization in comparisons???

[Ray Whitmer-3]

I have spent a bit of time test-driving various anonymity engines, and  
looking at comparisons whenever I can.

I have had a well-tuned freenet server running, processing gigabytes  
of info a day.

I have to take great exception to the characterization, in  
http://gnunet.org/faq.php3, of freenet as a low-latency system. I  
think you could only ever characterize it as a high-latency system.  
There is no comparison between Tor, which could set a standard for  
low-latency and Freenet, which in a best world is still quite high  
latency.

If gnunet is really higher latency than freenet, as the chart would  
have me believe, then you need a new category beyond high latency for  
it.

Ray Whitmer
ray@...



_______________________________________________
Bug-GNUnet mailing list
Bug-GNUnet@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnunet

[marcos.marado (Bugzilla)]

On Wednesday 15 August 2007 22:36, Ray Whitmer wrote:
> I have to take great exception to the characterization, in
> http://gnunet.org/faq.php3, of freenet as a low-latency system. I
> think you could only ever characterize it as a high-latency system.

Second that.

--
Marcos Marado


_______________________________________________
Bug-GNUnet mailing list
Bug-GNUnet@...
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnunet