![]() |
|
Register | FAQ | The Twelve Commandments | Members List | Calendar | Arcade | Find the Best VPN | Today's Posts | Search |
General Gnutella Development Discussion For general discussion about Gnutella development. |
| LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
| |||
![]() "* Take v0.6 handshaking and leave the 3rd step away (see [1]). (Revised, see rev 1 posting below) * Replace GIV with a real HTTP style PUT/POST header * Document GUID tagging * Rename Ultrapeers back to 'Superpeers' or 'Superservants' * Use ISO Latin 1 character set (ISO 8859-1) in search queries/queryhits/HTTP filenames. * Think about an Unicode addon, for world wide file trade (including Asia)! " The problem with this is that it's not very backward compatable. Trust me there have been hundreds of these type of proposals, none have made it. The reason 0.6 made it was the it was backward combatible. It only involved the hadn shaking mechanism, so a servent could have both 0.6 and 0.4 connections. |
| |
![]() | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Proposal for development of Gnutella (hashs) | Unregistered | General Gnutella Development Discussion | 61 | April 17th, 2002 08:35 AM |
My Proposal for XoloX!!! | Unregistered | User Experience | 1 | February 6th, 2002 08:11 AM |
What does 'Gnutella v0.6 protocoll' mean? | Moak | LimeWire Beta Archives | 0 | December 12th, 2001 10:03 PM |
---a Radical Proposal--- | Unregistered | General Gnutella / Gnutella Network Discussion | 0 | September 21st, 2001 12:08 PM |
protocol extension proposal | Unregistered | General Gnutella Development Discussion | 3 | September 16th, 2001 02:00 PM |