On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 09:44:33AM -0700, Ian Clarke wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 17, 2001 at 01:34:58PM +0200, Oskar Sandberg wrote:
> > The reason we would have to fucking wait a long time to restart when HTL
> > is 100, is because it takes a fucking long time to make 100 hops even if
> > everything goes right. To say that is because of how we calculate it is
> > silly beyond words.
>
> Not true. Ask anyone who requests at a HTL of 100, you will find that
> most requests return in a reasonable amount of time, even failed
> requests.
I guess this depends on your definition of "reasonable," but I've too
often seen a message saying:
The query was restarted somewhere on Freenet after a node failed to
reply, waiting another 1733 seconds before I give up
Personally, I don't consider half an hour to be "reasonable." I only
request things at high htl if I can't get it at a lower one. In fact,
I start at 16 and double it until I request at 128, which my node
should lower to 100 (if the over-100 request is causing the message,
please let me know). I don't really know what the state of the
network is right now, but it's at least big enough that quite often
requests at 128 don't get things I find on Snarfoo. In any case, I
understand a high-htl request taking a long time, but I wouldn't call
it reasonable for a production system.
Jay Tamboli
--
The danger (where there is any) from armed citizens, is only to the
*government*, not to *society*; and as long as they have nothing to revenge in
the government (which they cannot have while it is in their own hands) there are
many advantages in their being accustomed to the use of arms, and no possible
disadvantage.
-- Joel Barlow, "Advice to the Privileged Orders", 1792-93
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
URL:
<https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20010617/ff798f82/attachment.pgp>
