On July 31, 2008, Florent Daignière wrote: > * Matthew Toseland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-07-31 17:37:41]: > > > On Tuesday 22 July 2008 23:33, Florent Daignière wrote: > > > * Robert Mead <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-07-22 18:21:14]: > > > > > > > So it sounds like it will be about as secure as it currently is, but a > > > > lot more efficient. 5 to 3 is a big difference. > > > > > > ... On a small, ideal network. > > > > On a larger, messier network, it should make *more* difference. That is, if > > routing is the problem. > > Am I the only one thinking that routing isn't the problem but churn is? >
Not at all. Think that churn is making data much harder to find. While I think FOF routing will help shorten path lenghts, I do not think its going to help find older data all that much faster. I would love to see some simulations where the average location of the store influences swapping. It would be very interesting to see the effect on finding keys, especially rarely referenced keys, when this sort of swapping is in effect. Ed _______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org http://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
