Author: Jano Date: To: devl Subject: Re: [freenet-dev] Post-0.7.0 priorities
Florent Daignière wrote:
> * Jano <alejandro@???> [2008-05-14
> 11:21:05]:
>
>> > Personally I'm pretty skeptical of anything requiring more than 100MB.
>>
>> However, current implementation (IINM) uses the cache to resume downloads.
>> Thus, downloading anything bigger than that in more than one go has the
>> potential of a lot of waste in retries (hence BW & time).
>>
>> I know, it's a spurious reason since downloads in progress could be saved
>> somewhere else until completion... but still is a reason for now.
>>
>
> They are good reasons why we shouldn't implement download-resuming.
