mirror of git://erdgeist.org/opentracker
account downloaded before early returns
parent
65675cd4da
commit
c094695add
@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
|
|||||||
Q: Why is there no v6-support in opentracker?
|
Q: Why is there no v6-support in opentracker?
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
A: Although I tried very hard, implementing v6 right now would be a terrible waste of bandwidth, there is no compact format for v6 addresses, so instead of
|
A: Although I tried very hard, implementing v6 right now would be a terrible waste of bandwidth, there is no compact format for v6 addresses, so instead of
|
||||||
answering "d5:peers6:AAAAPPe" I'd have to send "d5:peersld2:ip39:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA4:port2:PPPPeee" for a single peer. Even if there was a
|
answering "d5:peers6:AAAAPPe" I'd have to send "d5:peersld2:ip39:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA:AAAA4:port2:PPPPeee" for a single peer. Even if there was a
|
||||||
compact mode, v6 addresses still would eat up thrice the memory, v4 addresses take. This, however, wouldn't be a show stopper.
|
compact mode, v6 addresses still would eat up thrice the memory, v4 addresses take. This, however, wouldn't be a show stopper.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
Other problems concern efficient peer selection for obviously v6-capable peers and how to select peers for non-v6 clients. v6 addresses eat up more memory on the
|
Other problems concern efficient peer selection for obviously v6-capable peers and how to select peers for non-v6 clients. v6 addresses eat up more memory on the
|
||||||
host, too ;)
|
host, too ;)
|
||||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue