[tahoe-dev] Can Tahoe works well in this scenario?

[Greg Troxel]

Brian Warner <warner at lothar.com> writes:

> We've also been considering changing our main client-to-server protocol
> away from TCP-based Foolscap and over to something else, which might
> make it easier to use UDP-based STUN-like protocols.

There is bulk data, and thus we need TCP-friendly congestion control.
So moving away from TCP requires reinventing it.

I am unclear on the details, but is it sane to propose socks support,
and that people run socks on their machines with public addresses?  My
such machine is running BSD so I can make it do what I want, and I don't
know what one can do on typical firewall/router/802.11 devices.

I gather this is blocked on twisted:
  http://twistedmatrix.com/trac/ticket/3508
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://tahoe-lafs.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/attachments/20101205/7605090c/attachment.asc>