Thread: Liberte Linux
View Single Post
Old 03-28-2013, 21:52   #10
DIYPatriot
Guerrilla Chief
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: TN/NC
Posts: 604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badger52 View Post
Question RE latency (or maybe lack of it). In terms of the nodality of the traffic stream, the actual service level achieved sounds like it could be similar to WINLINK, where someone connected might send a message via com'l internet to a relay in Perth, AUS and I can fire up the HF, hit a CONUS relay and the message is there in literally a few minutes, or will still be there later if I choose to wait.

Thanks again. I'm seeing several uses for this capability.
Gotta go get a ham sandwich...
In our implementation, the latency was exactly as you described. The original msg would persist at the nearest node b/c I designed it to broadcast to all connected and available/authenticated nodes. Once the message was retreived and downloaded (if applicable...remember the earlier security controls to prevent unwanted forwarding, etc) it would be removed from the background listener's archive of available messages for download to the peer. The message would persist until the recipient retrieved it via synchronization requests OR it could expire or be removed on the fly by the original sender or an admin level person. Apologies for the delay or any typos. I'm in the field and using a touchscreen
__________________
"Don't tell me what a good man should be. Don't tell me about his character or what should be in his heart - show me. And then show me again when I'm no longer here because I'll be watching." - my grandfather
DIYPatriot is offline   Reply With Quote