Mike Glover wrote: > What would happen if we allowed non-integral HTL's? We could > define a "standard" connection to have HTL 1. Connections faster > than the standard would have HTL < 1, slower would have HTL > 1. The > 1.3 hops that our college network is alotted might actually > represent 1.5 or 2.0 physical hops. > > Completely leaving aside implementation issues for the moment, and > assuming that we can actually define a "standard" connection, does > anybody see problems with this?
This is pretty similar to my earlier brainstorm that HTL be replaced with TTL (time to live). So if you want an answer within 5 seconds, that's your TTL. Faster hops take less time, so you get to search more of them. _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
