On Tue, 09 May 2000, Ian Clarke wrote: > Oskar Sandberg wrote: > > But it is exactly because such a node does not exist that it won't > > fall-over. > > The Update is not sent to one node but several, say 10-15 to begin with. > > Er, very dubious - wouldn't it be better if one of the nodes closer to > the epi-centre sent the data to 10-15 nodes the data, rather than your > own node where these update messages are likely to follow more or less > the same path anyway? This is the core of the idea behind my proposal.
But Freenet contains only references TO the "epi-center", not away from it. If I Request data, the nodes along the way will all catch the data and gain reference to the "epi-center", meaning they can quite quickly tell if the a there is a new version in it, but the epi-center does not gain any references towards the nodes that caught the data that it can send an update to. A possible alternative would be to actually implement such a system of "downwards references", but one does not exactly have to have ones nose in the code to realize what a headache that would be... > > Ian. > > _______________________________________________ > Freenet-dev mailing list > Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net > http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev -- Oskar Sandberg md98-osa at nada.kth.se #!/bin/perl -sp0777i<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<j]dsj $/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1 lK[d2%Sa2/d0$^Ixp"|dc`;s/\W//g;$_=pack('H*',/((..)*)$/) _______________________________________________ Freenet-dev mailing list Freenet-dev at lists.sourceforge.net http://lists.sourceforge.net/mailman/listinfo/freenet-dev
