Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191] helo=mx.sourceforge.net) by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76) (envelope-from ) id 1UwZp8-00077C-Jw for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 15:27:26 +0000 Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com designates 209.85.219.43 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.85.219.43; envelope-from=mh.in.england@gmail.com; helo=mail-oa0-f43.google.com; Received: from mail-oa0-f43.google.com ([209.85.219.43]) by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.76) id 1UwZp5-0004ri-Ak for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 15:27:26 +0000 Received: by mail-oa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id i7so8168902oag.16 for ; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 08:27:18 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.182.66.77 with SMTP id d13mr24905111obt.32.1373383637956; Tue, 09 Jul 2013 08:27:17 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mh.in.england@gmail.com Received: by 10.76.23.36 with HTTP; Tue, 9 Jul 2013 08:27:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <51DC24DE.2040801@gmail.com> References: <1372353053.10405.140661249237317.77984E1F@webmail.messagingengine.com> <1372605569.4937.140661250186789.39404E47@webmail.messagingengine.com> <51DB6548.5070909@lavabit.com> <1373367371.4283.140661253533454.0D7E544E@webmail.messagingengine.com> <51DC1761.5080303@gmail.com> <51DC24DE.2040801@gmail.com> Date: Tue, 9 Jul 2013 17:27:17 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: t2hUMrzFc4BDCtUO8rTqz9P96pw Message-ID: From: Mike Hearn To: Daniel F Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8fb1eab6e17dc704e115cb23 X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net. See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details. -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for sender-domain 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (mh.in.england[at]gmail.com) -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 1.0 HTML_MESSAGE BODY: HTML included in message 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature X-Headers-End: 1UwZp5-0004ri-Ak Cc: Bitcoin Dev Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] Proposal: MultiBit as default desktop client on bitcoin.org X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 09 Jul 2013 15:27:26 -0000 --e89a8fb1eab6e17dc704e115cb23 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 That's true - we could serve new users off our own servers and auto updates off SF.net mirrors, potentially. On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 4:57 PM, Daniel F wrote: > on 07/09/2013 10:28 AM Mike Hearn said the following: > > SourceForge has a horrible UI and blocks some countries. It also exposes > > us to a large and potentially hackable mirror network. Whilst we're not > > bandwidth constrained on our own servers, let's try and keep using them. > > the point was just that "if need be" free capacity is available without > having to throw money at it. until there's no need, doesn't matter. > > also hackability (and ui) should be irrelevant for the autoupdate > process (which i presume will do all kinds of checksum and sig > verification). and it's likely the autoupdates that will create very > lumpy download demand. > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > See everything from the browser to the database with AppDynamics > Get end-to-end visibility with application monitoring from AppDynamics > Isolate bottlenecks and diagnose root cause in seconds. > Start your free trial of AppDynamics Pro today! > http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=48808831&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk > _______________________________________________ > Bitcoin-development mailing list > Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development > --e89a8fb1eab6e17dc704e115cb23 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
That's true - we could serve new users off our own ser= vers and auto updates off SF.net mirrors, potentially.=C2=A0


On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at= 4:57 PM, Daniel F <nanotube@gmail.com> wrote:
on 07/09/2013 10:28 AM Mike Hearn said the f= ollowing:
> SourceForge has a horrible UI and blocks some countr= ies. It also exposes
> us to a large and potentially hackable mirror network. Whilst we'r= e not
> bandwidth constrained on our own servers, let's try and keep using= them.

the point was just that "if need be" free capacity is avail= able without
having to throw money at it. until there's no need, doesn't matter.=

also hackability (and ui) should be irrelevant for the autoupdate
process (which i presume will do all kinds of checksum and sig
verification). and it's likely the autoupdates that will create very lumpy download demand.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------= ---
See everything from the browser to the database with AppDynamics
Get end-to-end visibility with application monitoring from AppDynamics
Isolate bottlenecks and diagnose root cause in seconds.
Start your free trial of AppDynamics Pro today!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gam= pad/clk?id=3D48808831&iu=3D/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Bitcoin-development mailing list
Bitcoin-develo= pment@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-de= velopment

--e89a8fb1eab6e17dc704e115cb23--